THE  STRUGGLE 

FOR 
SELF-GOVERNMENT 


' 


STE 


presented  to  the 
UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA 
SAN  DIEGO 

by 

Mrs.  Griff ing  Bancroft 


THE    STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 


Other  books  by 
LINCOLN    STEFFENS 

r 

THE  SHAME  OF  THE  CITIES 


THE 

Struggle  for  Self-Government 

BEING  AN  ATTEMPT  TO  TRACE 
AMERICAN  POLITICAL  CORRUPTION  TO  ITS  SOURCES  IN 

SIX  STATES 

OF  THE  UNITED  STATES 
WITH  A  DEDICATION  TO  THE  CZAR 

BY 
LINCOLN  STEFFENS 


NEW  YORK 

McCLURE,  PHILLIPS  &  CO. 
MCMVI 


Copyright,  1906,  by 
cCLURE,  PHILLIPS  &  Co. 
Published  May,  1906 


Copyright,  1904-1905,  by 
THE  S.  S.  McCLURE  COMPANY 


CONTENTS 

PAGE 

DEDICATION — To  His  MAJESTY,  NICHOLAS  THE  SECOND, 
BY  THE  GRACE  OF  GOD,  EMPEROR  AND  AUTOCRAT  OF 
ALL  THE  RUSSIAS,  CZAR  OF  POLAND,  GRAND  DUKE  OF 
FINLAND,  ETC.,  ETC v 

FOLK'S  FIGHT  FOR  MISSOURI — SHOWING  How  TO  BEAT 
THE  BOODLE  SYSTEM  OF  ST.  Louis,  THE  PEOPLE  HAD 
TO  CHALLENGE  THE  SAME  SYSTEM  IN  THE  STATE  .  .  3 

CHICAGO'S  APPEAL  TO  ILLINOIS — SHOWING  How,  SINCE 
THE  CORRUPTION  OF  A  STATE  AND  ITS  CITIES  is  ALL 
ONE  SYSTEM,  MUNICIPAL  REFORM  MUST  INCLUDE 
STATE  REFORM  40 

WISCONSIN:  REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT  RESTORED — 
THE  STORY  OF  LAFOLLETTE'S  WAR  ON  THE  RAILROADS 
THAT  RULED  His  STATE  79 

RHODE  ISLAND:  A  CORRUPTED  PEOPLE — SHOWING  THAT 
AMERICAN  CITIZENS  CAN  BE  BOUGHT  (CHEAP)  TO 
SELL  OUT  THEIR  CITIES  AND  STATES 120 

OHIO:  A  TALE  OF  Two  CITIES — SHOWING  BUSINESS 
RULERS  OF  A  STATE  RESORTING  TO  ANARCHY  TO 
CHECK  MUNICIPAL  REFORM  161 

NEW  JERSEY:  A  TRAITOR  STATE,  PART  I. — THE  CON- 
QUEST: SHOWING  How  THE  PENNSYLVANIA  RAILROAD 
SEIZED  THE  GOVERNMENT 209 

NEW  JERSEY:  A  TRAITOR  STATE,  PART  II.— THE  BE- 
TRAYAL: SHOWING  How  THIS  BOUGHT  STATE  SOLD 
OUT  THE  UNITED  STATES  TO  THE  TRUSTS  FOR  MONEY  253 


TO 

HIS  MAJESTY,  NICHOLAS  THE  SECOND,  BY  THE 

GRACE    OF    GOD,   EMPEROR    AND    AUTOCRAT 

OF  ALL  THE  RUSSIAS,  CZAR  OF  POLAND. 

GRAND  DUKE  OF  FINLAND,  ETC.,  ETC. 

SIRE:  Without  permission,  but  with  the  best  of  private 
intentions,  I,  a  sovereign  American  citizen,  fearful  for 
my  crown  as  you  are,  Sire,  for  yours — I  lay  this 
book  at  the  foot  of  your  throne.  It  is  a  description  of 
something  you  dread,  popular  government,  and  I  wrote 
it  for  the  encouragement  of  my  own  people,  but  they 
do  not  see  much  to  encourage  them  in  it.  Maybe  your 
Majesty  will.  My  people  regard  the  book  as  a  series  of 
rather  disquieting  accounts  of  certain  particular,  excep- 
tional evils  of  a  kind  that  occur  here  and  there  and  now 
and  then,  but  which,  while  disgraceful  to  the  particular 


vi  DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR 

States  where  they  happened  to  happen,  have  no  general 
significance.  Now,  I  chose  the  States  described  not  because 
they  were  the  worst  (some  of  them  are  the  best  State 
governments  we  have) ,  but  as  types  of  the  essential  nature 
of  our  whole  government,  as  it  has  come  to  be. 

Sire,  these  pages  contain  several  accounts  of  a  revolu- 
tion, one  revolution  which  is  going  on  everywhere  in  my 
country,  in  all  the  cities  and  in  all  the  towns,  in  the  rural 
districts,  in  the  States,  and  in  the  United  States.  And  my 
people  will  not  see  it  so.  To  them,  as  to  most  men,  a  rev- 
olution is  something  like  that  which  you  are  in  the  throes 
of  now.  They  associate  images  of  blood  with  that  word, 
and  violence,  civil  war,  and  great  physical  discomfort.  And 
we  had  such  a  revolution  once.  It  was  one  hundred  and 
thirty  years  ago.  We,  the  American  people,  rose  then,  as 
your  Russians  are  rising  now,  and  we  achieved  then  what 
your  people  hope  to  achieve  now — liberty,  equality  before 
the  law,  and  self-government.  And  I  hear,  and  I  do  not 
doubt,  that  your  people,  knowing  of  our  days  of  1776,  and 
believing  (as  we  do  ourselves)  that  we  still  are  possessed 
of  the  fruits  of  that  ancient  triumph,  are  looking  to  us, 
to  the  history  and  the  happiness  of  the  American  people, 
for  inspiration,  example,  and  comfort.  Sire,  so  shall  you. 
They  find  here  what  they  seek.  Sire,  so  would  you. 

Your  Majesty  should  know  that  after  our  first,  the 
bloody  American  revolution,  a  second,  bloodless,  nameless 
and  slow,  set  in.  After  we  had  established  "  government  of 
the  people,  by  the  people,  for  the  people,"  we  went  back 
to  work.  We  let  who  would  rule  us,  and  somehow  or  other  it 
has  happened  that  those  men  have  come  into  power  who  see 


DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR  vii 

in  government, — what  Kings  see,  Sire, — a  source,  not  of 
common,  equal  justice  for  all,  but  of  special  advantages 
for  the  few;  and,  like  the  Kings  of  old,  they  have  made 
of  our  government  not  a  safeguard  of  the  free  growth  of 
human  character,  but  an  agency  for  the  development  of 
the  resources  of  the  country.  The  United  States  of  Amer- 
ica stands  for  business,  not  men,  Sire;  our  representative 
democracy  represents  not  the  peoplej  but  the  protected 
business  of  a  few  of  the  people.  And  protected  business  is 
— privilege.  Wherefore,  the  while  your  subjects  are  study- 
ing our  first  great  revolution,  I  offer  your  Majesty  this 
study  of  the  second,  the  greater  revolution  which  followed 
after  the  first  was  all  over. 

And  there  is  more  than  hope  for  your  future  in  this 
book,  Sire.  There  is  present  peace  therein  for  you  and 
for  your  people.  There  is  proof  in  it  that  the  horrid  con- 
flict that  has  been  waging  between  your  Majesty  and  your 
Majesty's  subjects  is  entirely  unnecessary.  Incredible? 
Let  us  consider  together  a  moment,  you  on  the  edge  of 
your  uneasy  throne,  I  on  mine,  you  a  falling  sovereign,  I 
a  falling  sovereign  citizen — let  us  peer  into  the  darkness 
of  your  land  with  the  light  from  mine.  What  is  the  issue 
between  you  and  your  would-be  citizens  ? 

Your  Majesty  seems  to  wish  to  rule,  you  alone.  Your 
people  are  demanding  representation  in  your  government. 
Apparently  you  both  regard  your  purposes  as  cross  and 
incompatible.  They  are  not  so.  Read  my  book  and  you  will 
see  that  we  Americans  have  what  we  call  "  representative 
democracy  " ;  but  we  have  Czars,  too.  It  is  true  we  do  not 
call  them  by  that  title;  we  call  them  bosses.  But  names 


viii  DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR 

and  titles,  like  forms  and  charters,  are  intended  to  de- 
ceive men,  not  the  rulers  of  men,  and  our  bosses  are  auto^- 
crats,  Sire,  as  you  are ;  no  more  so,  but  no  less.  They  make 
our  representatives  represent  them,  and  we,  satisfied  with 
the  appearance  of  things,  are  not  only  a  contented  people, 
we  are  proud ;  nay,  we  Americans  are  conceited  about  our 
government,  which  is  not  ours  at  all.  And  your  Russians, 
seeing  our  forms  and  hearing  our  boastings,  are  covetous 
of  our  "  liberty  " ;  and  they  are  demanding  of  your  Ma j  - 
esty  a  share  in  your  government.  Sire,  give  it  them.  Study 
our  Czars,  and  fear  not. 

But,  you  may  object,  we  Americans  have  many  Czars, 
and  you  desire  for  Russia  one  alone.  To  which  I  answer, 
Sire,  that  we  also  shall  have  but  one  boss.  Our  second 
revolution  is  not  yet  over ;  the  structure  of  our  government, 
the  actual  government,  is  not  quite  finished.  For  we  are  a 
conservative  people,  and  very  busy.  We  have  had  but 
little  time  for  politics.  Our  boss  system,  which  was  founded 
in  the  cities,  towns,  and  counties,  has  been  developed  only 
through  our  States  so  far.  But  our  State  bosses  send  them- 
selves to  the  United  States  Senate,  and  there  the  tendency 
plain  is  to  complete  and  perfect  the  autocracy  with  a 
national  boss.  Already  the  Senate  has  a  thing  called  "  the 
steering  committee,"  which  corresponds  roughly  to  your 
cabal  of  Grand  Dukes,  with  a  certain  Senator  Aldrich  for 
"  leader."  Now  the  natural  jealousy  of  autocratic  men 
may  retard  the  process  somewhat,  but,  if  things  go  on  as 
they  have  been  going,  some  Aldrich  some  day  is  bound  to 
become  the  acknowledged  political  boss  of  the  United 
States.  For,  with  the  Senators  controlling  the  Congress- 


DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR  ix 

men  from  their  States,  the  Boss-Senator  will  have  finally 
only  the  President  to  reduce  to  his  will.  This  he  can  do 
either  by  having  his  national  party  nominate  him  or  a 
colleague  for  that  office — as  was  proposed  in  the  case 
of  the  late  Senator  Hanna;  or,  better  still,  by  choosing 
for  candidates  weak  and  amiable  creatures  known  to  us 
as  "  safe  men."  This  is  the  way  "  our  "  governors  of  States, 
who  once  ranked  United  States  Senators,  have  been  reduced 
to  figureheads,  and  it  works  very  well  with  the  people. 
Man's  self-respect  has  ever  been  allayed  with  a  fig  leaf,  as 
all  wise  rulers  know,  and  I  have  seen  my  people  elect,  in 
New  York,  for  instance,  a  Mayor  McClellan  when  nothing 
could  induce  them  to  vote  for  his  Boss  Murphy.  This  has 
been  done  with  the  Presidency,  and  it  will  undoubtedly  be 
done  again.  Indeed,  this  same  Mayor  McClellan  has  been 
talked  of  for  that  high  office.  Oh,  mistakes  are  made,  of 
course.  Strong  men  will  slip  in  now  and  then,  but  with  a 
strong  hold  on  the  representative  branch  of  a  representa- 
tive government,  all  the  actual  boss  has  to  do  is  to  cry  out 
against  "  the  encroachment  of  the  executive  upon  the  rep- 
resentatives of  the  people,"  the  while  he  "  cajoles  "  or 
"  checks,"  "  advises  "  or  "  rebukes,"  "  humiliates  "  or 
finally  "  fights "  the  President  as  "  a  dangerous  man." 
If  it  comes  to  the  worst,  you  can  stand  pat  and  wait  for 
the  strong  President  to  retire;  his  term  is  four  years,  a 
Senator's  is  six ;  and  whereas  the  President  may  serve  only 
two  terms,  the  Senate  goes  on  forever.  So,  Sire,  while 
your  people  see  only  our  House  of  Representatives  and 
find  inspiration  in  it,  I  invite  you  to  look  into  our  Senate 
and  be  of  good  cheer.  The  United  States  Senate  will  show 


x  DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR 

you  that  autocracy  is  not  only  compatible  with  a  repre- 
sentative government ;  many  intelligent  United  States  Sen- 
ators will  tell  you  that  a  Czar  is  an  inevitable  consequence 
thereof. 

"  Ah,  yes,"  your  Majesty  may  say,  "  but  the  Ameri- 
can Czar  will  not  wholly  represent  himself.  He  will  derive 
his  authority,  not  from  God  and  by  heritage  in  his  family, 
but  from  the  State  bosses,  who  derive  from  the  bosses  of 
cities  and  counties;  wherefore  he  will  have  to  share  with 
them  both  his  power  and  his  profits." 

In  all  deference  to  your  Majesty,  I  beg  leave  most  re- 
spectfully to  submit,  that  you,  Sire,  do  not  wholly  repre- 
sent yourself.  Your  Grand  Dukes  support'  you,  as  our 
.Senators  would  support  our  senatorial  Czar.  Your  royal 
uncles,  cousins,  brothers,  friends — these  divide  your  power 
with  you,  share  your  privileges ;  their  cabal  "  counsels 
with  you,"  "  advises  " ;  they  frighten,  force,  deceive — as 
we  say  in  our  democratic  slang,  your  Grand  Dukes 
"  steer  "  you  very  much  as  our  Senators  play  upon  some  of 
our  Presidents.  No,  Sire,  you  are  not  absolute,  and  our 
Boss-Senator  will  not  be  -absolute.  An  autocracy,  in  the 
literal  sense  of  the  word,  is  impossible.  All  governments 
are,  at  bottom,  representative.  The  crucial  question  is, 
What  do  they  represent?  And  so  far  as  I  can  make  out 
they  all  represent  the  same  thing — privileges.  Your  Grand 
Dukes  represent  the  vested  interests  and  the  privileged 
classes  of  Russian  society,  and,  therefore,  they  are  power- 
ful; your  Majesty  represents  the  Grand  Dukes,  and,  there- 
fore, you  are  powerful.  So  our  national  boss,  when  he 
comes,  will  represent  our  Senators,  who  represent  now,  not 


DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR  xi 

our  States,  nor  the  people  of  the  States,  but  "  graft," 
big  business  graft,  which  is  our  rough  American  word  for 
what  you  call,  more  politely,  privilege. 

And,  as  for  keeping  the  crown  in  your  family,  that 
can  be  arranged  in  the  constitution.  I  notice  that  your 
Majesty  seems  to  have  a  superstitious  dread  of  the  very 
word  "  constitution."  Why?  The  thing  is  not  so  bad.  A 
constitution  has  its  uses.  But  your  Majesty  should  be  sure 
to  draw  the  instrument  and  graciously  grant  it  yourself 
to  your  people.  They  will  take  almost  anything  from  your 
hands.  If  you  resist  until  they  have  overthrown  you,  then, 
of  course,  Sire,  they  will  write  their  own  constitution,  and, 
since  there  will  be  no  Czar,  they  will  leave  you  and  the 
name  out  of  the  paper.  Bosses  will  grow  up  among  the 
people,  and  a  boss  will  grow  up  among  the  bosses,  and 
that  boss  will  be  the  Czar.  But  that  will  not  be  his  title, 
and  you  will  not  be  the  man.  But  all  the  people  want  is 
all  that  you  dread,  the  word.  Give  them  "  a  "  constitution ; 
let  it  bestow  upon  your  subjects  representation,  let  it  give 
them  almost  anything,  so  long  as  it  keeps  for  you  the 
essence  of  power,  which  is  control  of  the  graft;  see  to  it 
that  you  and  your  Grand  Dukes  can  give  pardon  to 
criminals,  license  to  vice,  franchises  to  business  men,  ex- 
emption from  taxation,  appropriations  to  churches,  chari- 
ties, colleges,  and  schools;  see  to  this,  Sire,  and  you  will 
have  thereafter  only  to  study  the  history  (as  it  is  not 
commonly  written)  of  constitutional  governments,  mon- 
archical, republican  (in  England,  France,  Germany, 
United  States,  etc.),  to  keep  the  crown  and  pass  it  down 
to  your  children  throughout  the  generations.  For  even 


xii  DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR 

if  your  foresight  err  and  you  make  mistakes  in  the  instru- 
ment, your  judges  will  correct  then.  Courts  are  made  up 
of  lawyers ;  lawyers  are  trained  to  revere  not  rights,  but 
property  and  possession;  not  justice,  but  the  law,  and  not 
the  spirit  of  the  law,  but  the  technicalities  and  holes 
therein ;  if  you  represent  property  and  the  law,  your  judges 
intuitively  will  mold  that  constitution  to  your  security. 
Sire,  a  constitution  is  not  only  an  innocent  gratification 
to  a  people;  shrewdly  interpreted  by  corporation  lawyers, 
or,  as  you  might  say,  by  King's  counsel,  a  constitution 
may  become  the  bulwark  of  the  rulers  of  a  people. 

It  is  a  pity  that  your  constitution  may  come  out  of  a 
(bloody)  revolution.  You  should  have  avoided  that  as  you 
would  a  bomb.  How?  By  the  suffrage.  Oh,  I  can  under- 
stand your  horror  of  that  word.  The  ballot  is  sovereign 
power,  of  course,  and  to  give  it  to  a  people  is  like  surrender- 
ing to  them  the  crown.  But,  if  your  people  insist  upon  it, 
grant  it,  Sire.  They  do  not  really  want  it ;  my  people 
don't.  If  you  gave  it  to  them,  they  wouldn't  know  how  to 
use  it ;  my  people  don't.  Your  people  know  only  that  they 
are  miserable,  that  something  or  other  is  wrong ;  and  their 
leaders  are  telling  them  that  what  they  want  is  the  suffrage 
and  a  government  representative  of  all  the  people.  And 
their  leaders  are  right  in  a  way.  But  my  people  are  dis- 
contented, too,  just  now.  They  also  feel  that  something 
is  wrong,  and  I,  having  investigated  their  complaints,  am 
convinced  that  what  we  Americans  lack  and  need  is  a 
government  representative  of  all  the  people;  not  of  graft, 
not  of  the  few  who  get  things  out  of  the  government,  but 
those  among  us — a  majority,  I  think — who  want  only 


DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR  xiii 

justice  and  fair  play.  But  the  American  people  do  not 
think  so.  They  don't  require  that  their  representatives  shall 
represent  them.  I  hear  them  say  that  this  representative 
or  that  one  is  dishonest,  that  he  is  a  grafter  or  takes  bribes ; 
never  that  he  represents  corruption.  Citizens  tell  me  that 
this  legislature  is  corrupt,  and  that  the  last  one  was,  and 
the  one  before  that;  they  don't  see  that  their  legislature 
represents  normally  and  systematically  the  sources  of  the 
corruption  of  the  State.  Sometimes  they  sigh  for  "  honest 
men  in  office,"  rarely  for  true  representatives.  Sire,  I  have 
yet  to  find  what  we  call  a  "  good  average  American  citizen  " 
demanding  representative  government  in  America.  He 
thinks  he  has  that,  and  he  has,  on  paper,  in  his  consti- 
tution, but,  you  see,  Sire,  he  doesn't  really  know  the 
difference. 

Lest  you  should  find  this  difficult  to  believe,  I  will  give 
you  an  example  from  my  own  city,  New  York.  New  York 
is  the  metropolis  of  America;  that  you  know.  But  you 
may  not  know  so  well  as  we  New  Yorkers  do  that  every- 
body in  America  who  amounts  to  anything  at  all  comes  to 
New  York,  so  that  this  great  city  contains  about  all  the 
intelligence  there  is  in  the  land,  especially  of  political 
intelligence.  Queer  men  and  cranky  notions  spring  up  in 
the  back  country,  but  nothing  that  happens  out  of  New 
York  or, — to  be  well  within  the  truth,  let  us  say — nothing 
that  happens  west  of  "  the  East "  is  typical.  Well,  some 
time  ago  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad  wished  to  get  into 
New  York  by  an  underground  route.  The  Pennsylvania 
Railroad  has  corrupted  every  city  and  State  that  it  ever 
has  entered;  to  admit  it  into  New  York  was  just  like  open- 


xiv  DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR 

ing  the  gates  to  a  revolutionary  army,  except  that  the  in- 
vaders carried  bribes  instead  of  guns.  No  matter.  We  are 
after  business  now,  not  character  and  liberty ;  and  another 
railroad  terminal  would  help  business.  So  we  wanted  the 
road  to  come  in.  Our  Board  of  Aldermen,  which  is  the 
representative  branch  of  our  city  government,  represented 
graft,  of  course,  and  it  wanted  to  boodle  with  the  Pennsyl- 
vania boodlers,  of  course.  So  our  representatives  wouldn't 
let  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad  in  unless  the  "  Penn,"  as  we 
call  the  road  affectionately,  would  out-boodle  the  old  bood- 
lers, the  older  roads  that  were  in.  Naturally  we  got  "  mad," 
we,  the  people  of  New  York.  Now  what  do  you  think  we 
did?  We  went  to  the  State  legislature.  This  legislature  is 
forever  interfering  with  us,  and  we  are  forever  shouting 
to  it  to  keep  off,  leave  us  alone,  and  give  us  "  home  rule." 
Yet  we  went  to  that  Legislature,  and  with  the  cry  "  home 
rule  "  on  our  lips  asked  that  Legislature  to  take  away  from 
the  representative  branch  of  our  government  the  power 
to  represent  us  in  the  matter  of  franchises.  I  say 
"  we  "  advisedly.  The  leader  in  this  movement  was  a  club 
to  which  I  belong.  This  club  is  to  New  York  what  New 
York  is  to  the  United  States — the  cream  of  the  cream  of 
political  intelligence  and  civic  righteousness.  There  are 
other  groups  of  reformers,  and  we,  of  my  club,  though 
firm,  are  very  tolerant  and  kind  to  them.  But  we  are  the 
real  people.  Now  it  never  occurred  to  us  to  make  those 
aldermen  represent  us.  Out  in  Chicago,  when  the  reformers 
saw  that  their  council  was  selling  them  out,  they  went  into 
the  wards  and  they  explained  to  the  people  what  the  matter 
was,  and  they  appealed  to  the  people  to  elect  men  who 


DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR  xv 

could  be  trusted  to  represent  them.  This  was  democratic 
instinct,  and  the  people  of  Chicago  responded  to  the  ap- 
peal, but,  you  see,  this  was  "  out  West " ;  and  queer.  We 
in  New  York,  we  of  the  East,  we  believe  not  in  the  people. 
Like  you,  Sire,  we  believe  in  ourselves.  So  we  went  not 
to  the  people;  we  went  to  the  representatives  of  the  State 
and  we  asked  them  to  destroy  the  power  of  our  representa- 
tives to  misrepresent  us  in  the  city.  The  Pennsylvania 
helped  us,  of  course,  but  we  Home  Rulers  think  we  did 
it;  and  we  did. 

Sire,  the  American  citizen  does  not  understand  self-  or 
representative  government,  and  does  not  demand  it.  He 
wants — what  do  you  think  the  American  people  are  ask- 
ing their  Czars  or  bosses  for?  Your  Majesty  never  would 
guess  it;  no  crowned  sovereign  would.  The  American 
people  are  asking  for  "  good  government."  All  they  mean 
by  this  is  clean  streets,  well  lighted  and  honestly  policed 
by  a  police  force  which,  if  it  must  blackmail  vice  and 
protect  crime,  shall  do  so  quietly  so  as  not  to  annoy  and 
scandalize  the  good  folk.  Oh,  there  are  a  few  other  things 
that  we  would  like  to  have ;  I  cannot  go  into  details.  I  as- 
sure your  Majesty,  however,  that  we  ask  nothing  that  a 
boss  or  a  Czar  cannot  grant  without  interfering  with 
autocracy.  Wherefore,  I  declare,  Sire,  that  your  people 
really  want  not  self-government,  not  "  liberty  "  and  "  free- 
dom," and  all  that  nonsense,  but  only  the  appearance  of 
justice  and  an  orderly  administration  of  public  affairs, 
and  especially  of  those  which  they  come  in  contact  with 
and  which  contribute  to  their  comfort  and  business 
prosperity. 


xvi  DEDICATION   TO    THE    CZAR 

And  if  you  don't  care  to  give  them  these  trifling  favors, 
you  need  not ;  they  will  not  use  the  suffrage  on  you  unless 
you  exasperate  them  beyond  endurance,  and  then  only 
when  some  "  demagogue  "  stirs  them  up.  Why,  about  a 
year  ago,  the  good  people  of  Philadelphia,  having  been 
offended  because  "  their "  police  protected  a  terribly 
vicious  practice  against  young  immigrant  girls,  prayed 
to  God  to  move  their  Mayor  to  stop  this  one  scandal.  Yes, 
Sire,  with  their  ballots  in  their  hands,  so  to  speak,  these 
American  citizens  sent  up  their  petition  to  Heaven.  Why 
not  to  the  Mayor?  Your  Majesty  has  heard  about  the 
"right  of  petition";  your  subjects  were  asking  for  that 
a  year  ago,  I  believe.  They  think  we  have  it,  and  we  have, 
some  of  us.  But  the  boss  of  Philadelphia  took  it  away  from 
Philadelphians  two  or  three  years  back — as  you  may  take 
it  away  from  your  people,  after  the  clamor  for  it  dies. 
The  Philadelphians  have  recovered  it  since,  but  only  by 
the  way.  The  boss,  having  committed  outrage  after  out- 
rage, and  having  seen  his  subjects  submit  to  them,  not 
only  with  patience,  but  with  apologies  for  him,  he  and  his 
Grand  Dukes  (leading  business  men)  came  to  have  for 
them  just  such  a  contempt  as,  let  me  say,  some  of  your 
Grand  Dukes  have  for  your  muziks.  The  boss  wanted 
to  sell  out  the  future  of  a  great  privilege — the  operation 
of  the  municipal  gas  plant  for  the  private  profit  for  three 
generations  of  his  favorite  Grand  Dukes.  All  might  have 
gone  well,  but  "  a  yellow  newspaper  "  (a  demagogic  sheet 
that  tells  the  truth  with  some  errors  of  fact)  aroused  the 
people,  and  they  revolted.  They  went  to  the  Mayor;  he 
was  one  of  those  mistakes  I  mentioned  above;  selected  by 


DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR  xvii 

the  boss  as  safe,  he  stood  for  the  people  when  they  stood 
for  themselves,  and,  of  course,  that  stopped  the  deal. 

Such  a  demonstration  of  the  power  of  the  American 
citizen  may  seem  startling  to  you,  but,  look  at  the  thing 
cold  and  hard;  what  was  it?  It  was  only  just  such  a  re- 
volt by  the  mob  as  you  have  to  meet  in  your  cities  now 
and  then.  It  has,  and  can  have,  no  significance  as  to  the 
suffrage  until  those  people  learn  to  use  the  suffrage 
regularly,  not  only  when  exasperated,  but  in  cold  blood. 
And  if  they  do  that,  you  can  take  the  suffrage  away  from 
them.  The  bosses  of  Philadelphia,  Denver,  Rhode  Island, 
and  of  many  other  cities  and  States,  have  done  that  in  this 
country,  and  the  people  do  not  rise  up  and  fight  to  keep 
it,  as  yours  may  fight  to  get  it.  In  Washington  the  whole 
citizen  body  was  disfranchised,  and  the  people  down  there 
did  not  resist.  They  consented,  and  they  tell  me  they  like 
it.  "  We  have  good  government,"  they  say. 

You  must  understand,  Sire,  that  it  is  a  great  deal  of 
trouble  to  vote.  Sometimes  elections  occur  as  often  as  once 
a  year,  and  then  your  ballot  has  a  lot  of  strange  names  on 
it.  When  your  people  first  get  the  suffrage  it  will  be  like 
a  new  toy  to  them ;  they  will  have  heard  that  it  makes  the 
difference  between  a  subject  and  a  citizen,  and  that  it  is  a 
great  privilege  to  exercise  a  sovereign  citizen's  right  to 
vote.  Their  leaders  will  have  told  them  this,  and  they  will 
send  these  leaders  up  to  you  to  represent  them.  For  a 
while  you  will  suffer  from  representative  government.  But 
by  and  by  the  leaders  will  begin  to  want,  not  liberty  and 
other  abstractions,  but  franchises,  offices,  and  other  good 
things;  and  as  for  the  people,  they  will  get  tired  of  the 


xviii  DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR 

game.  Inspired  by  the  illusion  of  freedom,  your  subjects 
are  busy  now  with  politics,  but  if  you  give  them  paper 
patterns  of  the  things  they  think  they  want,  they  will  go 
to  work ;  they  will  work  j  oyously  and  hard,  and  the  country 
will  enjoy  prosperity. 

Prosperity  is  a  tremendous  help  in  the  suppression  of 
a  people's  public  spirit,  and  you  must  take  care  of  that. 
Some  time  I  may  describe,  if  your  Majesty  is  interested, 
how  our  rulers  have  nursed  our  prosperity  and  used  it  to 
make  us  "  stand  pat."  For  the  present,  I  assure  you  that 
with  prosperity  your  people,  like  mine,  will  become  ab- 
sorbed in  business,  and  then,  Sire,  you  can  buy  their  leaders. 
Thus  "  their "  representative  government  will  represent 
you;  you,  Sire,  and  the  grafters.  What?  Oh,  yes,  they 
will,  the  leaders  of  the  people  will  sell  them  out;  at  least, 
they  do  with  us.  They  call  it  "  business,"  and  we  call  them 
"smart."  Your  Majesty  despises  business;  the  aristoc- 
racies of  Europe  all  look  down  on  "  shop-keepers,"  and 
I  can  understand  why.  But  this  is  a  mistake.  "  Business  " 
is  a  word  to  conjure  with;  business  is  a  means  to  your  end. 
I  saw  in  the  papers  February,  last  year,  that  when  your 
people  appeared  in  the  streets  of  St.  Petersburg  with  a  peti- 
tion which  they  wished  to  present  to  you,  you  sent  your 
Cossacks  to  shoot  them  down.  That  was  unnecessary.  Our 
business  method  is  more  business-like.  If  you  had  sent 
lobbyists  to  them,  with  bribes  (or  fees,  or  presents;  the 
word  is  important)  for  the  leaders,  you  would  have  got  the 
the  same  result,  and  not  only  would  you  have  caused  no 
pain,  no  scandal;  you  would  have  given  pleasure  and  the 
world  would  have  admired  you.  At  any  rate  this  part  of 


DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR  xix 

the  world  would.  Bribes,  Sire,  are  much  better  than  bul- 
lets. They  are  so  pleasant  that  even  the  voters  like  them. 
Yes,  indeed,  in  a  great  many  of  our  States  and  cities, 
especially  in  good  old  American  communities,  our  voters 
sell  their  votes.  True,  bribery  is  expensive,  and  though 
the  voters  are  cheap  (one  dollar  up  to  thirty,  a  head)  it 
is  a  waste  to  spend  cash  on  the  voters.  Our  method  is  to 
use  words,  promises,  names. 

Our  leaders,  partly  for  convenience  and  partly  to  keep 
down  expenses,  divide  us  into  what  they  call  parties.  To 
these  parties  they  give  attractive  names  like  "  Republican  " 
and  "  Democratic  " ;  they  tell  us  they  are  "  our  "  parties, 
and  they  do  announce  principles  or  platforms  which  seem 
to  differ  somewhat  as  to  policy.  But  really  both  of  them 
represent  graft  and  the  grafters.  We,  the  people,  however, 
are  set  to  yelling  and  marching  and  arguing  and  fighting 
for  "  our  "  parties  until  we  make  ourselves  believe  that 
they  really  are  ours.  It  is  almost  incredible,  but  I  can 
assure  your  Majesty  that  it  is  possible  to  transfer  a  peo- 
ple's allegiance  from  their  government  to  a  party  organi- 
zation. Let  me  suggest  that  you  send  over  to  the  United 
States  a  Commissioner.  I  will  show  him  great  majorities 
of  American  citizens  who  know  no  loyalty  to  their  city, 
their  State,  the  nation,  or  even  to  themselves,  but  only  to 
"  their  party."  Just  now  we  are  growing  tired  of  this 
sentiment  also,  and  an  "  independent  vote  "  is  disturbing 
our  political  situation.  You  can  see  what  a  menace  that 
is,  but  I  mention  it  only  to  show  you  the  very  best  feature 
of  the  suffrage,  viz.,  how  it  prevents  revolutions. 

I  assume  that  you  would  be  "  above  party  " ;  our  rulers 


xx  DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR 

are.  They  contribute  to  both  party  funds;  as  I  assume 
you  would.  In  that  case,  when  your  people  rose  up,  not  as 
in  Philadelphia  with  mob  violence,  but  with  genuine  deter- 
mination at  the  polls,  even  then,  Sire,  they  would  see  only 
the  especially  atrocious  sins  of  the  particular  men  your 
majority  party  had  put  in  office  to  hide  the  operations  of 
yourself  and  your  (popular)  leaders.  These  independent 
voters  would  vote  out  these  men.  Suppose  they  went  fur- 
ther and  voted  against  the  party,  against  the  whole  party 
ticket,  what  of  it?  They  would  have  to  vote  for  your 
other  party,  wouldn't  they  ?  Of  course,  if  they  should  keep 
this  up  for  a  number  of  elections  they  would  make  both 
parties  represent  them,  and  then  the  government  would 
come  to  represent  them.  But  they  won't  keep  it  up;  at 
least  my  people  don't.  A  "  landslide,"  as  we  call  such 
uprisings,  simply  has  the  effect  of  letting  off  the  feelings 
of  the  people;  they  go  back  to  their  business  and  things 
remain  as  bad — I  mean  as  good — as  before.  Your  other 
party  represents  you;  it  proves  to  be  "just  as  bad  as 
*  the '  party,"  so  we,  the  people,  give  up  in  despair. 

In  other  words,  Sire,  with  the  suffrage,  what  you  and 
your  Grand  Dukes  dread  as  revolutions  would  become  what 
in  our  free  country  we  know  as  reform  movements.  Reform 
movements  serve  to  perfect  the  boss  system  of  graft.  The 
people  soon  realize  this,  so  instead  of  trying  to  recover 
self-government  they  quit  and  submit.  For,  imagine  a 
moment :  If  your  people  had  a  constitution,  representative 
government  (on  paper),  and  the  self -responsibility  that 
appears  to  go  with  the  ballot,  what  more  could  they  ask 
of  you  ? 


DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR  xxi 

"  A  free  press,"  you  say.  Your  people  are  asking  for 
that  and  you  think  it  is  awful.  You  think  you  need  your 
official  censor  to  keep  the  newspapers  from  telling  the 
people  the  truth?  Not  at  all.  We  have  a  free  press,  but 
we  have  a  censorship,  too.  Our  Grand  Dukes  wait  until 
a  newspaper  has  the  confidence  of  the  public,  then  they 
buy  the  property.  The  people  don't  know  the  difference. 
The  Grand  Duke  "  directs  the  policy,"  but  there  is  no 
official  censor,  so  the  people  go  on  calling  it  "  their  paper." 
Our  free  press  prints  the  news,  Sire. 

"  Free  speech?  "  I  would  give  them  that,  too,  if  I  were 
in  your  place.  That  means  only  surrendering  your  right 
to  send  orators  to  Siberia,  and  such  drastic  measures  are 
all  out  of  date.  After  you  write  the  words  "  freedom  of 
speech  "  into  the  constitution  all  you  have  to  do  is  to  keep 
men  boasting  of  their  liberty  and  showing  off  their  cour- 
age, while  in  a  hundred  little  ways  you  encourage  "  soci- 
ety "  to  discourage  "  demagogery,"  "  sensationalism," 
etc.  Men  are  natural  cowards ;  the  rulers  of  the  race  have 
taught  them,  however,  to  face  bullets  and  defy  death  and 
torture.  Physical  courage  we  have,  and  so  have  your 
people.  But  try  ridicule,  Sire,  or  the  frown  of  their  own 
leaders ;  if  that  isn't  sufficient,  have  some  of  their  business 
taken  away.  That  will  settle  freedom  of  speech.  At  any 
rate  it  often  settles  it  in  my  own  country.  Why,  I  know 
cities  where  men  have  suffered  from  a  tyranny  as  great  as 
yours — except  as  to  physical  injury — and  these  same  men 
have  asked  me  into  their  private  offices  to  tell  me  the  truth ; 
yet  were  they  afraid  to  speak.  Afraid  of  what?  They 
were  afraid,  Czar,  of  their  Czar! 


xxii  DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR 

And,  saving  your  Majesty's  feelings,  I  wish  to  add  one 
more  observation :  I  am  not  talking  about  a  down-trodden, 
ignorant,  half-barbarous  people  like  your  poor  Russians. 
My  advice  to  you  is  founded  upon  what  I  have  seen  among 
the  American  people,  the  proudest,  the  bravest,  the  most 
enlightened — the  greatest  nation  of  men  and  women  that 
ever  trod  upon  this  earth.  Now,  it  may  just  be  that  they 
will  turn  around  some  day  and  take  back  their  government 
and  rule  themselves.  I  can  see  signs  of  the  dawn  of 
political  intelligence  here  and  there  and  now  and  then. 
But  I  am  afraid  they  will  be  satisfied  again  with  clean 
streets,  and  a  "  good  man  for  Mayor,"  or  the  promise  of 
"  good  government "  from  some  boss  wiser  than  any  we 
yet  have  had.  And  if  you  will  read  our  history  you  also 
will  doubt  the  promises  of  reformers  who  are  afraid  to 
hurt  business.  I  expect  to  see  the  people  get  tired  of 
"  exposure  "  and  seek  a  more  "  optimistic  "  prospect  than 
the  everlasting  effort,  which  is  what  self-government 
means. 

But,  Sire,  even  if  I  am  wrong,  you  are  safe.  For  your 
people  are  several  hundred  years  behind  mine,  and  they 
have  still  to  go  through  what  mine  have  gone  through, 
so  that  I  feel  that  I  can  offer  you  for  your  peace  and  for 
the  peace  of  your  subjects,  in  these  your  days  of  sore  trou- 
ble, this  assurance  dug  up  out  of  the  depths  of  the  land  of 
the  free: 

Your  Majesty  may  grant  all  that  your  people  ask,  and 
more, — representative  government  and  a  constitution,  free 
speech  and  a  free  press,  education  and  the  suffrage, — and 
yet  you  may  rule  them  as  you  rule  them  now,  absolutely 


DEDICATION    TO    THE    CZAR  xxiii 

and  with  little  more  heed  to  their  best  interest.  For  have  I 
not  shown,  Sire,  that  we,  the  great  American  people,  have 
all  that  we  want  of  all  of  these  things,  and  that,  neverthe- 
less, our  government  differs  from  yours — in  essentials — 
not  so  much  as  you  thought,  not  so  much  as  your  people 
think,  and  not  nearly  so  much  as  my  people  think? 

LINCOLN  STEFFENS. 


THE    STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 


FOLK'S     FIGHT     FOR     MISSOURI 

SHOWING    HOW,    TO    BEAT    THE    BOODLE    SYSTEM    OF 

ST.  LOUIS,  THE  PEOPLE  HAD  TO  CHALLENGE 

THE   SAME   SYSTEM   IN  THE   STATE 

(April,    1904) 

EVERY  time  I  attempted1  to  trace  to  its  sources  the  polit- 
ical corruption  of  a  city  ring,  the  stream  of  pollution 
branched  off  in  the  most  unexpected  directions  and  spread 
out  in  a  network  of  veins  and  arteries  so  complex  that 
hardly  any  part  of  the  body  politic  seemed  clear  of  it. 
It  flowed  out  of  the  majority  party  into  the  minority; 
out  of  politics  into  vice  and  crime;  out  of  business  into 
politics,  and  back  into  business ;  from  the  boss,  down 
through  the  police  to  the  prostitute,  and  up  through  the 
practice  of  law  into  the  courts ;  and  big  throbbing  arteries 
ran  out  through  the  country  over  the  State  to  the  Nation 
— and  back.  No  wonder  cities  can't  get  municipal  reform ! 
No  wonder  Minneapolis,  having  cleaned  out  its  police  ring 
of  vice  grafters,  discovered  boodle  in  the  council!  No 
wonder  Chicago,  with  council-reform  and  boodle  beaten, 
found  itself  a  Minneapolis  of  police  and  administrative 
graft!  No  wonder  Pittsburg,  when  it  broke  out  of  its 
local  ring,  fell,  amazed,  into  a  State  ring!  No  wonder 
New  York,  with  good  government  under  Mayor  Seth  Low, 
voted  itself  back  into  Tammany  Hall ! 

1  See  "  The  Shame  of  the  Cities,"  McClure,  Phillips  &  Co. 


4         STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

They  are  on  the  wrong  track;  we  are,  all  of  us,  on  the 
wrong  track.  You  can't  reform  a  city  by  reforming  part 
of  it.  You  can't  reform  a  city  alone.  Y.ou  can't  re- 
form politics  alone.  And  as  for  corruption  and  the  under- 
standing thereof,  we  cannot  run  'round  and  'round 
in  municipal  rings  and  understand  ring  corruption ;  it 
isn't  a  ring  thing.  We  cannot  remain  in  one  city,  or 
ten,  and  comprehend  municipal  corruption;  it  isn't  a 
local  thing.  We  cannot  "  stick  to  a  party,"  and  follow 
party  corruption ;  it  isn't  a  partisan  thing.  And  I  have 
found  that  I  cannot  confine  myself  to  politics  and  grasp 
all  the  ramifications  of  political  corruption.  It  isn't 
political  corruption.  It's  corruption.  The  corruption 
of  our  American  politics  is  our  American  corruption, 
political,  but  financial  and  industrial,  too.  Miss  Tarbell 
has  shown  it  in  the  trust,  Mr.  Baker  in  the  labor  union, 
and  my  gropings  into  the  misgovernment  of  cities  have 
drawn  me  everywhere,  but,  always,  always  out  of  politics 
into  business,  and  out  of  the  cities  into  the  State.  Business 
started  the  corruption  of  politics  in  Pittsburg;  upheld 
it  in  Philadelphia ;  boomed  with  it  in  Chicago  and  withered 
with  its  reform;  and  in  New  York,  business  financed  the 
return  of  Tammany  Hall.  Here,  then,  is  our  guide  out  of 
the  labyrinth.  Not  the  political  ring,  but  big  business — 
that  is  the  crux  of  the  situation.  Our  political  corruption 
is  a  system,  a  regularly  established  custom  of  the  country, 
by  which  our  political  leaders  are  hired,  by  bribery,  by 
the  license  to  loot,  and  by  quiet  moral  support,  to  conduct 
the  government  of  city,  State  and  Nation,  not  for  the 
common  good,  but  for  the  special  interests  of  private 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  5 

business.  Not  the  politician,  then,  not  the  bribe-taker,  but 
the  bribe-giver,  the  man  we  are  so  proud  of,  our  successful 
business '  man — he  is  the  source  and  sustenance  of  our 
bad  government.  The  captain  of  industry  is  the  man  to 
catch.  His  is  the  trail  to  follow. 

We  have  struck  that  trail  before.  Whenever  we  followed 
the  successful  politician,  his  tracks  led  us  into  it,  but  also 
they  led  us  out  of  the  cities — from  Pittsburg  to  the  State 
Legislature  at  Harrisburg;  from  Philadelphia,  through 
Pennsylvania,  to  the  National  Legislature  at  Washing- 
ton. To  go  on  was  to  go  into  State  and  National  politics, 
and  I  was  after  the  political  corruption  of  the  city  ring 
then.  Now  I  know  that  these  are  all  one.  The  trail  of  the 
political  leader  and  the  trail  of  the  commercial  leader 
are  parallels  which  mark  the  plain,  main  road  that  leads  off 
the  dead  level  of  the  cities,  up  through  the  States  into  the 
United  States,  out  of  the  political  ring  into  the  System, 
the  living  System  of  our  actual  government.  The  highway 
of  corruption  is  the  "  road  to  success." 

Almost  any  State  would  start  us  right,  but  Missouri  is 
the  most  promising.  Joseph  W.  Folk,  the  Circuit  Attor- 
ney of  St.  Louis,  has  not  only  laid  wide  open  the  road  out 
there;  he  knows  it  is  the  way  of  a  system.  He  didn't  at 
first.  He,  too,  thought  he  was  fighting  political  corrup- 
tion, and  that  the  whole  of  it  was  the  St.  Louis  ring. 
But  he  got  the  ring.  Mr.  Folk  convicted  the  boss  and 
nearly  all  the  members  of  the  "  boodle  combine "  that 
was  selling  out  his  city;  yet  the  ring  does  not  break. 
Why?  Because  back  of  the  boodlers  stand  the  big  busi- 
ness men  who  are  buying  the  city  up.  But  Folk  got  the 


6         STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

business  men,  too ;  Charles  H.  Turner,  president  of  the 
Suburban  Railway  Company,  president  of  the  Common- 
wealth Trust  Company;  Philip  Stock,  secretary  of  the 
St.  Louis  Brewery  Association ;  Ellis  Wainwright,  the 
millionaire  brewer;  George  J.  Kobusch,  president  of  the 
St.  Louis  Car  Company;  Robert  N.  Snyder,  banker  and 
promoter,  of  Kansas  City  and  New  York;  John  Scullen, 
ex-president  of  street  railways,  a  director  then  and  now  of 
steam  railways,  a  director  then  and  to  the  end  of  the  Loui- 
siana Purchase  Exposition.  These  are  not  "  low-down  poli- 
ticians " ;  they  are  "  respectable  business  men."  Having 
discovered  early  that  boodlers  flew  in  pairs ;  that  wherever 
there  was  a  bribe-taker  there  also  was  a  bribe-giver,  Folk 
hunted  them  in  pairs.  And  in  pairs  he  brought  them 
down.  And  still  the  ring  does  not  break.  What  is  the 
matter  ? 

That's  what's  the  matter.  "  That  man  Folk  "  is  attack- 
ing the  System.  If  he  had  confined  his  chase  to  that 
unprotected  bird,  the  petty  boodler,  all  might  have  been 
well.  Indeed,  there  was  a  time,  just  before  the  first  trial  of 
the  boss,  Colonel  Ed  Butler,  when  the  ring  was  in  a  panic 
and  everybody  ran.  If  he  had  stayed  his  hand  then,  Folk 
could  have  been  Governor  of  Missouri  with  the  consent  of 
"  his  party,"  and  a  very  rich  man  besides.  But  he  would 
not  stop.  These  were  not  the  things  he  was  after.  At 
that  moment  he  was  after  Boss  Butler;  and  he  got  him. 

"  And  the  conviction  of  Butler  was  the  point,"  he  said, 
"  where  we  passed  out  of  the  ring  into  the  System." 

Butler  was  not  only  the  boss  of  the  ring;  he  was  the 
tool  of  the  System.  He  was  the  man  through  whom  the 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  7 

St.  Louis  business  man  did  business  with  the  combine,  and 
Folk  hadn't  caught  all  the  business  men  involved.  The 
first  time  I  met  him,  early  in  his  work,  he  was  puzzled  by 
the  opposition  or  silence  of  officials  and  citizens,  who,  he 
thought,  should  have  been  on  his  side.  The  next  time  I 
saw  him  this  mystery  was  clearing.  One  by  one  those 
people  were  turning  up  in  this  deal  or  'way  back  of  that 
one.  He  could  not  reach  them;  he  can  never  reach  them 
all;  but  there  they  were,  they,  their  relatives,  their 
friends,  their  lawyers,  their  business  and  social  associates 
— "  nobody  can  realize,"  said  Mr.  Folk,  "  the  infinite 
ramifications  of  this  thing."  "  They,"  "  this  thing,"  the 
"  vested  interests  "  of  St.  Louis,  are  the  St.  Louis  System. 
Corruption  was  saved,  not  ended,  by  the  very  thorough- 
ness of  Mr.  Folk.  The  ring  was  rallied,  not  smashed,  by 
his  conviction  of  its  boss.  The  boodlers  who  had  wanted 
to  turn  state's  evidence  "  stood  pat."  Why  ?  They  had 
an  assurance,  they  said,  that  "  not  one  of  them  would  go 
to  the  pen."  Who  made  this  promise?  Butler.  Ed  Butler, 
himself  sentenced  to  three  years  in  the  penitentiary,  gave 
this  explicit  assurance,  and  he  added  (this  was  last  sum- 
mer) that  "  the  courts  will  reverse  all  Folk's  cases,  and, 
when  Folk's  term  expires,  we  will  all  get  off,  and  the  fel- 
lows that  have  peached  will  go  to  jail."  Maybe  Butler 
lied ;  some  of  the  politicians  said  that  it  would  be  "  bad 
politics  "  to  reverse  "  all  Folk's  cases,"  and  that  some, 
possibly  Butler's  own,  would  have  to  be  affirmed.  Butler, 
however,  was  not  afraid,  and,  sure  enough,  in  December 
his  case  was  reversed.  All  the  boodle  cases  so  far  have 
been  reversed.  Not  a  boodler  is  in  jail  to-day  (January 


8         STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

22,  1904),  and  the  same  court  gave  a  ruling  which  made 
it  necessary  for  Folk  to  reindict  and  retry  half  a  dozen  of 
his  cases.  The  boodlers  are  a  power  in  politics.  Butler  sits 
in  the  councils  of  the  Democratic  party.  He  sat  there  with 
the  business  men  and  with  the  new,  young  leaders  who  drew 
up  the  last  platform,  which  made  no  mention  of  boodle,  and 
he  assisted  in  the  naming  of  the  tickets.  After  the  last 
election,  Butler  was  able  to  reorganize  the  new  House  of 
Delegates,  with  his  man  for  Speaker,  and  the  superin- 
tendent of  his  garbage  plant  (in  the  interest  of  which  he 
offered  the  bribe  for  which  he  was  convicted)  for  chair- 
man of  the  Sanitary  Committee.  But  the  nominations  he 
had  helped  to  make  were  not  only  those  of  aldermen,  but 
of  the  candidates  for  the  vacancies  on  the  bench  which  was 
to  try  boodle  cases,  and  also  for  that  court  which  was  to 
hear  these  cases,  and  his  own,  on  appeal !  And  the  presiding 
justice  of  this,  the  criminal  branch  of  the  Supreme  Court 
of  Missouri,  went  upon  the  stump  last  fall  and  declared 
that  a  man  who  thought  as  Mr.  Folk  thought,  and  did  as 
Mr.  Folk  did,  had  better  leave  the  State ! 

Appalling?  It  did  not  appall  Mr.  Folk.  He  realized 
then  that  it  was  a  System,  not  the  ring,  that  he  was  fight- 
ing, and  he  went  after  that.  There  was  another  way  into 
it.  One  Charles  Kratz,  the  head  of  the  council  combine, 
did  business,  like  Butler,  with  and  for  business  men.  Kratz 
fled  to  Mexico  with  means  supplied  by  his  business  back- 
ers, but  Mr.  Folk  used  the  good  offices  of  the  President 
and  the  Secretary  of  State  to  get  the  man  back.  And  he 
succeeded ;  he  had  Kratz  brought  back.  The  hope  was  that 
Kratz  would  confess  and  deliver  up  his  principals.  The 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  9 

other  boodlers,  however,  received  Kratz  with  a  champagne 
dinner,  and  he  also  stood  pat.  But  even  if  Kratz  should 
surrender,  and  even  if  Folk  thus  were  to  smash  the  Butler 
ring  and  catch  not  five  or  six,  but  fifty,  of  the  captains  of 
industry  behind  it — still,  I  believe,  the  System  would 
stand.  Why?  Because  "this  thing"  is  more  than  men, 
and  bigger  than  St.  Louis. 

All  the  while  Mr.  Folk  was  probing  the  city  he  kept  an 
eye  on  the  State.  It  was  out  of  his  jurisdiction,  but 
it  affected  his  work.  Some  of  the  silent  opposition  he 
encountered  came  from  State  officials,  and  the  court  which 
was  inspiring  so  much  faith  in  boodlers  was  a  State  court. 
These  officials  were  not  implicated  in  his  exposures,  and 
these  judges  were  honest  men,  but  the  State  Legislature, 
at  Jefferson  City,  sent  forth  significant  rumors,  and  about 
these  Folk  gossiped  with  the  St.  Louis  boodlers,  who 
explained  that  corruption  was  an  ancient  custom  of  the 
State.  Helpless,  but  informed,  Folk  watched  and  waited, 
till  at  last  his  chance  came. 

One  day  in  February,  1903,  when  a  bill  in  which  the 
Speaker  of  the  House  was  interested  failed  of  passage, 
that  officer  left  his  chair  in  anger,  saying,  "  There  is 
boodle  in  this."  The  House  was  disturbed.  Folk's  work 
had  opened  the  public  mind  to  suspicion,  and  the  news- 
papers were  alert.  Investigations  were  ordered,  one  by 
the  House  Committee,  which  found  nothing;  another  by 
a  Jefferson  City  Grand  Jury,  which  resulted  in  a  state- 
ment by  Circuit  Attorney  R.  P.  Stone  that  it  was  all  "  hot 
air  "  and  that,  anyhow,  he  had  no  ambition  "  to  become  a 
second  Folk."  (Stone  was  indicted  himself  afterward.) 


10       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

Then  the  Governor  directed  Attorney-General  E.  C.  Crow 
to  take  charge,  and  Crow  took  charge.  Picking  Lieuten- 
ant-Governor  Lee  for  a  weakling,  he  concentrated  on  him. 
Lee  was  telling  things,  bit  by  bit,  but  he  kept  denying 
them,  and  the  jury  was  uneasy  and  reluctant.  The  out- 
come of  the  inquiry  was  in  doubt  in  Jefferson  City,  when 
Mr.  Folk  heard  that  "  floating  all  around  town  "  were  a 
lot  of  thousand-dollar  bribe  bills  which  were  distributed 
at  the  Laclede  Hotel.  The  Laclede  Hotel  is  in  St.  Louis, 
and  St.  Louis  is  Folk's  bailiwick.  Folk  jumped  in.  He 
traced  the  bills,  and,  in  a  jiffy,  he  had  the  whole  inside 
story.  He  gave  out  an  interview  directed  at  Lieutenant- 
Governor  Lee,  who  saw  it ;  saw,  he  said,  "  that  Folk 
had  him,"  and  ran  to  Attorney-General  Crow  to  confess. 
Changing  his  mind,  he  fled  the  State,  but  Folk  gave  out 
another  interview  that  brought  him  back.  Meeting  and 
agreeing  on  a  course,  Folk  and  Crow  worked  together. 
They  got  Lee's  confession  in  full,  and  his  resignation  of 
the  Lieutenant-Governorship ;  and  with  all  this  for  a  lever, 
they  opened  the  mouths  of  other  legislators.  Indictments 
followed,  and  trials ;  Crow  took  all  the  evidence  and  car- 
ried on  the  dull,  slow  trials,  which  we  need  not  follow. 

The  lid  was  off  Missouri.  The  stone  Mr.  Folk  had  had 
so  long  to  leave  unturned  was  lifted.  What  was  under  it? 
Squirming  in  the  light  and  writhing  off  into  their  dark 
holes  were  State  Senators  and  State  officers,  State  com- 
mittee-men and  party  leaders,  but  also  there  were  the 
Western  Union  Telegraph  Company,  the  Missouri  Pacific 
Railroad,  the  St.  Louis  and  San  Francisco,  the  Iron  Moun- 
tain and  Southern,  the  Wabash;  Mr.  Folk's  old  friend, 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  11 

the  St.  Louis  Transit  Company ;  the  breweries,  the  stock 
yards,  the  telephone  companies ;  business  men  of  St. 
Louis,  St.  Joseph,  and  Kansas  City — the  big  business  of 
the  whole  State.  There  they  were,  the  "  contemptible  " 
bribe-taker  and  the  very  "  respectable "  bribe-giver,  all 
doing  business  together.  So  they  still  traveled  in  pairs ; 
and  the  highway  still  lay  between  the  deadly  parallels — 
business  and  politics.  The  System  was  indeed  bigger  than 
St.  Louis ;  it  was  the  System  of  Missouri. 

What,  then,  is  the  system  of  Missouri?  The  outlines  of 
it  can  be  traced  through  the  "  confessions  of  State  Sena- 
tors which,"  Folk's  grand  jury  said,  "  appall  and  astound 
us  as  citizens  of  this  State.  Our  investigations,"  they 
added,  "  have  gone  back  twelve  years,  and  during  that 
time  the  evidence  shows  that  corruption  has  been  the 
usual  and  accepted  thing  in  State  legislation,  and  that, 
too,  without  interference  or  hindrance.  .  .  .  We  have 
beheld  with  shame  and  humiliation  the  violation  of  the 
sacred  trust  reposed  by  the  people  in  their  public 
servants." 

Just  as  in  the  city,  the  System  in  the  State  was  corrup- 
tion settled  into  a  "  custom  of  the  country  " ;  betrayal  of 
trust  established  as  the  form  of  government.  The  people 
elect,  to  govern  for  them,  representatives  who  are  to  care 
for  the  common  interest  of  all.  But  the  confessing  Sena- 
tors confessed  that  they  were  paid  by  a  lobby  to  serve 
special  interests.  Naturally  enough,  the  jurors,  good  citi- 
zens, were  incensed  especially  at  the  public  servants  "  who 
sold  them  out."  But  who  did  the  buying?  Who  are  the 
lobby?  The  confessions  name  Colonel  William  H.  Phelps, 


12       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

John  J.  Carroll,  and  others,  lawyers  and  citizens  of  stand- 
ing at  the  bar  and  in  the  State,  and  they  were  the  agents 
of  the  commanding  business  enterprises  of  the  State. 
Moreover,  they  were  aggressive  corruptionists.  You  hear 
business  men  say  that  they  are  blackmailed,  that  the  poli- 
ticians are  corrupt,  and  that  the  "  better  people  "  have 
to  pay. 

Colonel  Phelps,  an  officer  of  the  Missouri  Pacific,  and 
the  lobbyist  of  the  Gould  interests,  has  said  that  he  had  to 
exercise  great  cunning  to  keep  the  Legislature  corrupt. 
New  legislators  often  bothered  him,  especially  "  honest 
men,"  Senators  who  would  not  take  money.  Sometimes  he 
"  got "  them  with  passes,  which  was  cheap,  but  not  sure, 
so  he  had  been  compelled  sometimes  actually  to  "  rape  " 
some  men,  as  he  did  Senator  Fred  Busche,  of  St.  Louis. 

Busche  is  himself  a  business  man,  a  well-to-do  pie- 
baker,  and  he  went  to  Jefferson  City  full  of  high  purpose 
and  patriotic  sentiment,  he  said.  Among  the  measures  up 
for  passage  was  a  bill  to  require  all  railways  to  keep  a 
flagman  at  all  crossings.  It  was  a  "  strike  "  bill.  Phelps 
himself  had  had  it  introduced,  to  prove  his  usefulness  in 
killing  it,  perhaps,  or  to  raise  money  for  himself  and  his 
pals.  (The  corrupt  corporations  are  often  cheated  by 
their  corrupt  agents.)  At  any  rate,  Phelps  asked  Busche 
to  vote  against  the  bill,  and  Busche  did  so.  A  day  or  two 
later  Phelps  came  up  to  Busche,  thrust  a  hundred-dollar 
bill  into  his  pocket,  then  hurried  away  and  remained  out  of 
sight  till  Busche  had  become  reconciled  to  the  money. 
"  After  that,"  Busche  added,  "  Phelps  had  me."  Busche 
accepted  a  regular  salary  of  $500  a  session  from  the  rail- 


FOLK'S    FIGHT   FOR    MISSOURI  13 

road  lobbyist,  and  other  bribes:  $5.00  on  the  St.  Louis 
transit  bill,  $500  on  an  excise  bill,  etc.  He  estimated  that 
he  had  made  corruptly  some  $15,000  during  his  twelve 
years. 

Phelps  put  Busche  into  the  "  Senate  Combine,"  which  is 
just  such  a  non-partisan  group  of  a  controlling  majority 
as  that  which  Colonel  Butler  wielded  in  the  municipal 
legislature  councils  of  St.  Louis.  Butler,  however,  was  a 
boss ;  Phelps  is  not.  There  is  no  boss  of  Missouri  as  there 
is  of  New  York,  Pennsylvania,  and  other  more  advanced 
States.  Phelps  is  the  king  of  the  lobby,  and  the  lobby 
rules  by  force  of  corruption.  The  lobbyists,  representing 
different  special  business  interests,  bought  among  them  a 
majority  of  the  legislators,  organized  the  Senate,  ran 
dominant  committees,  and  thus  controlled  legislation.  You 
could  do  business  with  any  lobbyist,  and  have  the  service, 
usually,  of  all,  or  you  could  deal  with  a  member  of  the 
combine.  Indeed,  the  "  combine  "  was  free  to  drum  up 
trade  when  times  were  dull,  and  Mr.  Folk  quotes  a  tele- 
gram from  a  member  sent  on  such  a  mission  to  St.  Louis : 
"  River  rising  fast,"  it  said.  "  Driftwood  coming  down. 
Be  there  to-morrow." 

"  Driftwood "  was  boodle  bills  for  business  men,  and 
some  of  it  was  blackmail,  but  it  was  all  irregular.  The 
regular  business  was  more  businesslike.  The  "  combine  " 
was  only  the  chief  instrument  of  the  lobby  and  was  made 
up  of  dishonest  legislators.  The  lobby  controlled  also  the 
honest  men.  For  these  belonged  to  their  party.  The  cor- 
porations and  big  businesses  contribute  to  all  campaign 
funds,  and  this  is  the  first  step  toward  corruption  every- 


14       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

where.  It  is  wholesale  bribery,  and  it  buys  the  honest 
legislator.  He  may  want  to  vote  against  the  "  combine," 
but  the  lobby  serves  the  party  as  well  as  business,  and  the 
"  State  Committee  "  has  to  "  stand  in."  That  is  the  way 
the  Democratic  party  got  control  of  the  police  and  elec- 
tion machinery  of  Missouri  cities  and  forced  those  nor- 
mally Republican  communities  into  the  Democratic  line. 
The  lobby  delivers  the  dishonest  votes.  In  return  for 
such  services  and  for  the  campaign  contributions,  the 
State  Committee  of  the  dominant  Democratic  party  has 
to  deliver  the  honest  votes,  and  often,  too,  the  Governor  of 
the  State.  As  for  the  minority  party,  the  Republicans 
in  Missouri  are  like  the  minority  everywhere:  just  as  cor- 
rupt and  more  hungry  than  the  majority.  Disrupted  by 
quarrels  over  the  Federal  patronage,  the  Republican  legis- 
lators follow  the  Democrats  for  more,  for  dribblets  of  graft, 
and  the  first  Senator  convicted  by  Crow  was  a  Republican. 
There  is  nothing  partisan  about  graft.  Only  the  people 
are  loyal  to  party.  The  "  hated  "  trusts,  all  big  grafters, 
go  with  the  majority.  In  Democratic  Missouri,  the  De- 
mocracy is  the  party  of  "  capital."  The  Democratic 
political  leaders,  crying  "  down  with  trusts,"  corner  the 
voters  like  wheat,  form  a  political  trust,  and  sell  out  the 
sovereignty  of  the  people  to  the  corporation  lobby.  And 
the  lobby  runs  the  State,  not  only  in  the  interest  of  its 
principals,  but  against  the  interest  of  the  people.  Once, 
when  an  election  bill  was  up — the  bill  to  turn  over  the 
cities  to  the  Democrats — citizens  of  Kansas  City,  Demo- 
crats among  them,  had  to  hire  a  lobbyist  to  fight  it,  and 
when  this  lobbyist  found  that  the  interest  of  his  corpora- 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  15 

tions  required  the  passage  of  the  bill,  he  sent  back  his  fee 
with  an  explanation.  And  this  story  was  told  me  as  an 
example  of  the  honesty  of  that  lobbyist !  Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor Lee  in  his  confession  gave  another  such  example. 
Public  opinion  forced  out  of  committee,  and  was  driving 
through  the  Senate,  a  bill  to  put  a  just  tax  on  the  fran- 
chises of  public  service  corporations.  The  lobby  dared  not 
stop  it.  But  Colonel  Phelps  took  one  day  "  his  accustomed 
place  "  behind  a  curtain  back  of  the  Lieutenant-Governor's 
chair,  and  he  wrote  out  amendment  after  amendment, 
passed  them  to  Senator  Frank  Farris,  who  introduced 
them,  and  the  lobby  put  them  through,  so  that  the  bill 
passed,  "  smothered  to  death." 

When  Lieutenant-Governor  Lee  drew  aside  that  curtain 
he  revealed  the  real  head  of  the  government  of  Missouri. 
I  mean  this  literally.  I  mean  that  this  system  I  have  been 
describing  is  a  form  of  government;  it  is  the  government. 
We  must  not  be  confused  by  constitutions  and  charters. 
The  constitution  of  Missouri  describes  a  Governor  and  his 
duties,  a  Legislature  and  the  powers  lodged  in  a  Senate 
and  a  House  of  Representatives,  etc.,  etc.  This  is  the 
paper  government.  In  Missouri  this  paper  government 
has  been  superseded  by  an  actual  government,  and  this 
government  is: — a  lobby,  with  a  combine  of  legislators, 
the  Democratic  State  Committee,  and  State  leaders  and 
city  bosses  for  agents.  One  bribe,  two  bribes,  a  hundred 
bribes  might  not  be  so  bad,  but  what  we  have  seen  here  is 
a  System  of  bribery,  corruption  installed  as  the  motive, 
the  purpose,  the  spirit  of  a  State  government.  A  revolu- 
tion had  happened.  Bribes,  not  bullets,  were  spent  in  it, 


16       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

and  the  fighting  was  slow  and  quiet,  but  victory  seemed 
sure;  the  bribe-takers  were  betraying  the  government  of 
the  people  to  an  oligarchy  of  bribe-givers,  when  Joseph 
Folk  realized  the  truth. 

"  Bribery,"  he  declared,  "  is  treason,  and  a  boodler  is  a 
traitor." 

"  Bosh !  "  cried  the  lawyers.  "  Poppy-cock,"  the  cynics 
sneered,  and  the  courts  ruled  out  the  cases.  "  Bribery," 
said  Judge  Priest,  at  the  trial  of  the  banker,  Snyder,  "  is, 
at  the  most,  a  conventional  crime."  "  Corruption  is  an 
occasional  offense,"  the  ring  orators  proclaim,  but  they 
answer  themselves,  for  they  say  also,  "  corruption  is  not 
a  vice  only  of  Missouri,  it  is  everywhere." 

"  It  is  everywhere,"  Folk  answers,  and  because  he  has 
realized  that,  because  he  realized  that  boodling  is  the 
custom  and  that  the  "  occasional "  boodler  who  sells  his 
vote  is  selling  the  State  and  altering  the  very  form  of  our 
government,  he  has  declared  boodle  to  be  a  political  issue. 
And  because  the  people  do  not  see  it  so,  and  because  he 
saw  that  no  matter  how  many  individual  boodlers  he  might 
catch,  he,  the  Circuit  Attorney  of  St.  Louis,  could  not  stop 
boodling  even  in  St.  Louis,  Mr.  Folk  announced  himself  a 
candidate  for  Governor,  and  is  now  appealing  his  case  to 
the  people,  who  alone  can  stop  it.  His  party  shrieked  and 
raged,  but  because  it  is  his  party,  because  he  thinks  his 
party  is  the  party  of  the  people,  and  because  his  party  is 
the  responsible,  the  boodle,  party  in  his  State,  he  made  the 
issue  first  in  his  own  party.  He  has  asked  his  people  to 
take  back  the  control  of  it  and  clean  it  up. 

Thus,  at  last,  is  raised  in  St.  Louis  and  Missouri  the 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  17 

plain,  great  question:  Do  the  people  rule?  Will  they,  can 
they,  rule?  And  the  answer  of  Missouri  will  be  national 
in  importance.  Both  the  Democracy  and  democracy  are 
being  put  to  the  test  out  there. 

But  Missouri  cannot  decide  alone.  "  Corruption  is  every- 
where." The  highway  of  corruption  which  Folk  has  taken 
as  the  road  to  political  reform  goes  far  beyond  Missouri. 
When  he  and  Attorney-General  Crow  lifted  the  lid  off 
Missouri,  they  disturbed  the  lid  over  the  United  States, 
and  they  saw  wiggling  among  their  domestic  industries 
and  State  officials,  three  "  foreign  trusts  " — the  American 
Sugar  Refining  Company,  the  American  Book  Company, 
and  the  Royal  Baking  Powder  Company.  These  are  na- 
tional concerns ;  they  operate  all  over  the  United  States ; 
and  they  are  purely  commercial  enterprises  with  probably 
purely  commercial  methods.  What  they  do,  therefore,  is 
business  pure  and  simple;  their  way  will  be  the  way  of 
business.  But  off  behind  them  slunk  a  United  States  Sena- 
tor, the  Honorable  William  J.  Stone.  He  was  on  the  same 
road.  So  they  still  run  in  pairs,  and  the  road  to  success 
still  lies  between  the  two  parallels,  and  it  leads  straight  to 
Washington,  where,  in  political  infinity,  as  it  were,  in  that 
chamber  of  the  bosses,  the  United  States  Senate,  the  par- 
allels seem  to  meet.  Are  the  corrupt  customs  of  Missouri 
the  custom  of  the  country  ?  Are  the  methods  of  its  politics 
the  methods  of  Business?  Isn't  the  System  of  that  State 
the  System  of  the  United  States  ?  Let  us  see. 

Among  the  letters  of  the  confessed  boodler,  Lieutenant- 
Governor  Lee,  to  his  friend  Daniel  J.  Kelly,  are  many 
references  to  his  ambition  to  be  Governor  of  the  State. 


18       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

When  Folk  decided  to  run  for  that  office  the  politicians 
were  shocked  at  his  "  ambition  " ;  he  had  not  served  the 
party,  only  the  people.  But  Lee,  whom  they  knew  to  be  a 
boodler,  was  not  regarded  as  presumptuous.  He  was  a 
"  possibility."  And,  in  his  first  letter  on  the  subject  to 
Kelly,  he  asks  how  he  can  sell  himself  out  in  advance  to 
two  trusts.  "  Of  course  you  can  help  me  get  a  campaign 
fund  together,"  he  says,  "  and  I  will  be  grateful  to 
you.  .  .  .  How  would  you  tackle  Sugar-Tobacco  if 
you  were  me  in  the  campaign-fund  matter?  "  Kelly  must 
have  advised  Lee  to  write  direct,  for  the  next  letter  is  from 
H.  O.  Havemeyer,  expressing  "  my  hopes  that  your  polit- 
ical aspirations  will  be  realized,"  and  adding,  suggestively, 
"  If  I  can  be  of  any  service  I  presume  your  representative 
will  appear.  (Signed)  H.  O.  Havemeyer."  Lee  wanted 
Kelly  to  "  appear,"  and  there  was  some  correspondence 
over  a  proposition  to  have  the  contribution  made  in  the 
form  of  advertisements  in  Lee's  two  trade  journals.  But 
Lee  "  needed  help  badly,  as  the  country  papers  must  be 
taken  care  of,"  so  he  asks  Kelly  "  to  so  present  the  case  to 
Mr.  H.  that  he  will  do  some  business  with  the  papers  and 
help  me  out  personally  besides.  Do  your  best,  old  man," 
he  pleads,  "  and  ask  Mr.  H.  to  do  his  best.  A  lift  in  time  is 
always  the  best."  And  Mr.  H.  did  his  best.  Lee  had 
arranged  that  Kelly  was  to  see  Havemeyer  on  both  per- 
sonal and  business  accounts,  but  the  "  personal  "  came  by 
mail,  and  Lee  wires  Kelly  to  "  drop  personal  matter  and 
confine  to  advertising.  Personal  arranged  by  mail."  And 
then  we  have  this  note  of  explanation  to  "  Friend  Kelly  " : 
"  The  party  sent  me  $1,000  personally  by  mail.  If  you 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  19 

do  anything  now  it  will  be  on  the  advertising  basis.  Truly 
and  heartily,  Lee." 

Here  we  have  a  captain  of  industry  taking  a  "  little 
flyer  "  in  a  prospective  governor  of  a  State.  Mr.  Have- 
meyer  probably  despises  Lee,  but  Mr.  Havemeyer  himself 
is  not  ashamed.  Business  men  will  understand  that  this  is 
business.  It  may  be  bad  in  politics,  but  such  an  investment 
is  "  good  business."  And  there  is  my  point  ready  made : 
This  "  bad  "  politics  of  ours  is  "  good  "  business. 

A  longer  trail  is  that  of  William  Ziegler;  his  business, 
the  Royal  Baking  Powder  Company;  and  the  company's 
agent,  Daniel  J.  Kelly.  In  Missouri  they  said  Crow  was 
"  after  "  United  States  Senator  Stone,  but  "  they  travel 
in  pairs,"  so  he  had  to  begin  with  the  business  men,  as  Folk 
did.  He  indicted  first  Kelly,  then  Ziegler,  for  bribery. 
Lee,  whose  confession  caused  the  indictment  of  Kelly,  wired 
this  warning :  "  D.  J.  Kelly :  Your  health  being  poor,  brief 
recreation  trip  if  taken  would  be  greatly  beneficial.  James 
Sargent."  Kelly  took  the  recreation  trip  to  Canada,  and 
Ziegler,  in  New  York,  resisted  extradition  to  Missouri  for 
trial.  The  prospect  was  of  a  long  lawyers'  fight,  the  result 
of  which  need  not  be  anticipated  here.  Our  interest  is  in 
the  business  methods  of  this  great  commercial  concern,  the 
Royal  Baking  Powder  "  trust,"  and  the  secrets  of  the  suc- 
cess of  this  captain  of  the  baking-powder  industry.  And 
this,  mind  you,  as  a  key  to  the  understanding  of  "  politics." 

We  have  been  getting  into  business  by  following  poli- 
tics. Now,  for  a  change,  we  will  follow  a  strictly  business 
career  and  see  that  the  accepted  methods  of  business  are 
the  despised  methods  of  politics,  and  that  just  as  the  trail 


20       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

of  the  successful  politician  leads  us  into  business,  so  the 
trail  of  the  successful  business  man  leads  us  into  politics. 

Ziegler's  "  success  story  "  is  that  of  the  typical  poor 
boy  who  began  with  nothing,  and  carved  out  a  fortune 
of  many,  many  millions.  He  was  not  handicapped  with 
a  college  education  and  ethical  theories.  He  went  straight 
into  business,  as  a  drug-clerk,  and  he  learned  his  morals 
from  business.  And  he  is  a  "  good  business  man."  This 
is  no  sneer.  He  told  me  the  story  of  his  life  one  night,  not 
all,  of  course,  for  he  knew  what  the  purpose  of  my  article 
was  to  be ;  but  he  told  me  enough  so  that  I  could  see  that 
if  the  story  were  set  down — the  daring  enterprise,  the 
patient  study  of  details,  and  the  work,  the  work,  the  terri- 
ble, killing  work — if  this  all  were  related,  as  well  as  "  the 
things  a  business  man  has  to  do,"  then,  I  say,  the  story  of 
William  Ziegler  might  do  him,  on  the  whole,  honor  as  well 
as  dishonor.  But  this,  the  inspiring  side,  of  such  stories, 
has  been  told  again  and  again,  and  it  does  not  give  "  our 
boys  "  all  the  secrets  of  success,  and  it  does  not  explain  the 
state. either  of  our  business  or  of  our  politics.  I  have  no 
malice  against  Mr.  Ziegler ;  I  have  a  kind  of  liking  for  him, 
but  so  have  I  a  liking  for  a  lot  of  those  kind,  good  fellows, 
the  low-down  politicians  who  sell  us  out  to  the  Zieglers. 
They,  too,  are  human,  much  more  human  than  many  a 
"  better  man."  How  often  they  have  helped  me  to  get  the 
truth !  But  they  do  sell  us  out,  and  the  "  good  business 
men  "  do  buy  us  out.  So  William  Ziegler,  who  also  helped 
me,  he,  to  me  here,  is  only  a  type. 

Ziegler  went  into  the  baking-powder  business  way  back 
in  1868  with  the  Hoaglands,  a  firm  of  druggists  at  Fort 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  21 

Wayne,  Indiana.  The  young  man  mastered  the  business, 
technically  as  a  pharmacist,  commercially  as  a  salesman. 
He  fought  for  his  share  in  the  profit ;  he  left  them  and 
established  a  competitive  business  to  force  his  point,  and 
in  1873  they  let  him  in.  So  you  see,  Young  Man,  it  isn't 
alone  sobriety,  industry,  and  honesty  that  make  success, 
but  battle,  too.  Ziegler  organized  the  Royal  Baking 
Powder  Company  in  1873,  with  himself  as  treasurer. 

The  business  grew  for  three  or  four  years,  when  it  was 
discovered  that  alum  and  soda  made  a  stronger  leaven, 
and  cheaper.  Worse  still,  alum  was  plentiful.  Anybody 
could  go  into  its  manufacture,  and  many  did.  The  Royal, 
to  control  the  cream  of  tartar  industry,  had  contracted  to 
take  from  European  countries  immense  quantities  of  argol, 
the  wine-lees  from  which  cream  of  tartar  is  made.  They 
had  to  go  on  making  the  more  expensive  baking-powder  or 
break  a  contract.  That  would  be  "  bad  business." 

So  Ziegler  was  for  war.  His  plan  was  to  "  fight  alum." 
His  associates,  less  daring  than  he,  objected,  but  Ziegler 
won  them  over,  and  thus  was  begun  the  "  Alum  War," 
famous  in  chemistry,  journalism,  and  legislation.  Outsiders 
knew  little  about  it,  but  they  can  find  the  spoils  of  Zieg- 
ler's  battle  in  the  bosom  of  their  own  family.  Let  any  man 
in  the  North,  East,  and  West,  ask  himself  if  he  does  not 
think  "  alum  in  food  is  bad  " ;  if  he  can't  answer,  let  him 
ask  his  wife.  She  will  not  know  exactly  why,  but  she  is 
pretty  sure  to  have  a  "  general  impression  "  that  it  is 
injurious  in  some  way  and  that  "  the  Royal  is  pure,"  "  the 
best."  This  general  impression  was  capitalized  by  Ziegler 
in  1898,  at  a  valuation  of  many  millions  of  dollars.  He 


22       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

combined,  in  a  trust,  the  Cleveland,  Price,  and  Royal  cream 
of  tartar  companies ;  their  separate  capitalization  amounted 
to  something  over  one  million.  The  trust  was  capitalized 
at  $20,000,000. 

Now,  how  did  Ziegler  plant  this  general  impression  which 
was  sold  as  so  much  preferred  and  common  stock?  He 
began  the  war  by  hiring  chemists  to  give  "  expert  opin- 
ions "  against  alum  and  for  cream  of  tartar.  The  alum 
people,  in  alarm,  had  to  hire  chemists  to  give  opposite 
opinions  for  alum  and  against  cream  of  tartar.  What  the 
merits  of  the  chemical  controversy  are,  no  man  can  decide 
now.  Hundreds  of  "  eminent  scientific  men,"  chemists, 
physiologists,  and  doctors  of  medicine,  have  taken  part 
in  it,  and  there  are  respectable  authorities  on  both  sides. 
The  Royal's  array  of  experts,  who  say  "  alum  is  bad,"  is 
the  greater,  and  they  are  right  as  to  "  alum  in  food." 
But  that  is  a  trick  phrase.  The  alum  people  say,  and  truly, 
that  the  alum  in  baking-powder  disappears  in  the  bread, 
just  as  cream  of  tartar  does,  and  that  the  whole  question 
resolves  itself  into  the  effects  on  the  human  system  of  what 
is  left.  In  the  case  of  the  alum,  the  residuum  is  hydrate  of 
aluminum,  of  which  Dr.  Austin  Flint,  who  experimented 
with  Professor  Peter  F.  Austin  and  Dr.  E.  E.  Smith,  says 
that  it  "  is  inert ;  has  no  effect  upon  the  secretion  of  gastric 
juice,  nor  does  it  interfere  with  digestion ;  and  it  has  no 
medicinal  effects."  On  the  other  hand,  the  alum  party  say 
that  the  residuum  of  cream  of  tartar  powder  is  "  Rochelle 
salts,  an  irritant  drug  with  purgative  qualities."  This 
the  Royal  overwhelmed  with  testimony,  but  Ziegler  does 
not  believe  much  in  defense.  He  attacks.  His  was  a  war  on 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  23 

"  impure  food,"  and  his  slogan  was  short  and  sharp : 
"  alum,  a  poison."  That  was  all. 

And  that  is  enough  for  us.  Our  war  is  on  "  impure 
business,"  and,  whatever  the  truth  is  about  alum  and  cream 
of  tartar,  the  truth  about  Ziegler  and  the  Royal  Baking 
Powder  is  this :  they  were  making  alum  baking-powders 
themselves.  All  the  while  Ziegler  was  buying  those  expert 
testimonials  against  it,  he  was  manufacturing  and  selling 
alum  baking-powder. 

This,  on  his  own  testimony.  He  brought  a  suit  once 
against  the  Hoaglands,  his  associates,  and  he  wanted  to 
show  that  he,  not  they,  had  made  the  business  what  it  was ; 
so  he  went  upon  the  stand  and  swore  that  Tie  started  the 
alum  war;  he  hired  Dr.  Mott,  the  first  chemist,  etc.,  etc. 
Listen,  then,  to  this  captain  of  industry  confessing  himself : 

"  I  have  heard  the  testimony  about  what  is  called  the 
'  alum  war,'  "  he  says.  "  I  instituted  it  upon  the  part  of 
the  company.  I  employed  Dr.  Mott  personally — it  is  pos- 
sible that  Mr.  Hoagland  may  have  made  the  money  ar- 
rangement with  him ;  I  also  visited  other  chemists  and  got 
certificates ;  I  did  all  that  business  connected  with  the 
chemical  part  of  the  investigation,  preparing  the  matter; 
I  originated  that  matter ;  Mr.  Joseph  C.  Hoagland  bitterly 
opposed  it;  he  said  war  on  alum  would  injure  the  sale  of 
all  baking-powders  ;  that  it  would  bring  all  baking-powders 
into  disrepute,  and  it  was  difficult  for  the  public  to  tell  an 
alum  baking-powder  from  a  cream  of  tartar  powder. 

*'  We  had  also  as  a  company  been  manufacturing  alum 
baking-powder,  which  was  in  the  market,  not  under  our 
brand  'Royal?  but  another  brand.  The  theory  was  that 


24       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

our  competitors  might  get  hold  of  some  of  that,  analyze  It, 
and  show  that  we  also  manufactured  alum  baking-powder." 

Nor  is  that  all.  Ziegler  says  he  "  got "  the  chemists. 
How  he  "  got "  them  I  don't  know,  but  the  company  had 
at  one  time  an  ammonia  skirmish.  They  were  making 
ammonia  baking-powder,  and  the  alum  people  "  showed 
them  up,"  so  Ziegler  had  to  have  ammonia  testimonials 
from  leading  chemists,  and  he  sent  out  for  them. 

"  I  got  some  myself,"  he  testifies.  "  I  went  over  and  saw 
Professor  Norton,  who  had  given  an  adverse  opinion.  I 
got  him  to  change  his  mind.  He  did  not  deny  what  he  had 
said  before,  but  he  gave  us  something  that  answered  our 
purpose." 

"  Answered  our  purpose !  "  There  you  have  the  equiva- 
lent in  business  of  the  political  platform.  The  purpose 
answered  in  the  alum  war  was  advertisement.  Having 
"  got "  the  chemists'  opinion,  he  had  to  turn  that  into 
public  opinion,  so  he  had  to  "  get  "  the  press.  And  he 
got  the  press,  and  his  method  of  advertising  fixed  public 
opinion.  How? 

The  Chamber  of  Commerce  of  Richmond,  Va.,  recently 
"  in  seeking  the  source  of  a  prejudice  which  once  existed 
in  the  State  [against  alum  baking-powder,  which  is  a 
staple  in  the  South]  believes,"  it  says,  "  that  it  is  to  be 
found  in  a  comprehensive  system  of  what  may  be  called 
'  blind  advertising  '  or  '  reading  notices  '  inaugurated  years 
ago  in  the  newspapers  of  the  country  by  the  Royal."  The 
Chamber  printed  a  sample  contract  : 

Please  publish  articles  as  below,  each  one  time,  in  Daily 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  25 

and  Weekly,  as  pure,  straight  reading,  on  top  half  of  fifth 
page,  set  in  the  same  size  and  style  of  type,  and  with  the 
same  style  of  heading  as  the  pure  reading  adjoining,  leaded 
or  solid  to  correspond  with  such  pure  reading,  to  be  sur- 
rounded by  pure  reading,  and  without  date,  mark  or  anything 
to  designate  them  as  paid  matter;  and  with  the  express  under- 
standing that  they  are  not  at  date  of  publication  or  afterward 
to  be  designated  or  classed  by  any  article  or  advertisement  in 
your  paper  as  advertisements,  or  as  paid  for,  or  as  emanating 
from  us.  Start  with  top  one  on  list  and  publish,  in  same  order, 
daily  two  days  apart  and  weekly  one  week  apart. 

ROYAL  BAKING  POWDER  Co. 

This  step  paved  the  way  to  the  publication  of  anything 
the  Royal  might  want  to  say  as  news  or  as  the  disinterested 
opinion  of  the  paper.  They  would  get  a  case  of  poisoning, 
for  example,  have  it  investigated  and  reported  in  one  news- 
paper, then  they  would  send  the  clipping  for  publication 
to  their  other  newspapers.  Here  is  one: 

From    the    Commercial-Appeal,   Memphis,    Tenn.,  Jan.   2,    1900. 

SAID    TO    BE    ALUM    POISONING SERIOUS     CASE     OP     ILLNESS 

REPORTED  FROM  THE   USE   OP   IMPURE  BAKING  POWDER. 

Johnstown    (Pa.)  Tribune. 

The  poisoning  of  the  Thomas  family,  of  Thomas  Mill, 
Somerset  County,  four  members  of  which  were  reported  to 
have  been  made  dangerously  ill  by  impure  baking  powder 
used  in  making  buckwheat  cakes,  has  been  further  investigated. 

The  original  can,  with  the  remainder  of  the  baking  powder 
left  over  after  mixing  the  cakes,  was  secured  by  Dr.  Critch- 
field.  The  powder  had  been  bought  at  a  neighboring  country 
store,  and  was  one  of  the  low-priced  brands. 


26       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

Dr.  Critchfield  said  that  the  patients  had  the  symptoms  of 
alum  poisoning.  As  the  same  kind  of  baking  powder  is  sold 
in  many  city  groceries  as  well  as  country  stores,  Dr.  Critch- 
field thought  it  important  that  a  chemical  examination  should 
be  made  to  determine  its  ingredients.  He  therefore  trans- 
ferred the  package  of  powder  to  Dr.  Schill,  of  this  city,  for 
analysis.  Dr.  SchilFs  report  is  as  follows: 

"  I  certify  that  I  have  examined  chemically  the  sample 
of  ...  baking  powder  forwarded  to  me  by  Dr.  Crich- 
field.  The  specimen  contained  alum." 

DR.  FRANCIS  SCHILL,  JR.,  Analyst. 

Alum  is  used  in  the  manufacture  of  the  lower-priced  bak- 
ing powders.  It  is  a  mineral  poison,  and  for  this  reason  the 
sale  of  baking  powders  containing  it  is  in  many  cities  pro- 
hibited. 

The  Thomas  family  tried  to  answer  this  "  news  item." 
Six  of  them  signed  a  statement  that  they  were  sickened 
not  by  alum  baking-powder,  but  by  arsenical  poisoning 
from  a  newly-painted  sausage  machine ;  that  "  the  doctors 
did  not  tell  us  that  the  symptoms  was  alum  poisoning,  but 
arsenical  poisoning  " ;  that  they  were  "  using  alum  baking- 
powder  then  and  are  yet,  as  Dr.  Schill  and  Dr.  Critchfield 
said  it  was  all  right."  And  the  physicians  made  affidavits 
to  the  same  effect,  one  of  which,  Dr.  Critchfield's,  covers 
both: 

Personally  appeared  before  me  J.  B.  Critchfield,  who  de- 
poses and  says  as  follows:  That  I  am  the  doctor  who  attended 
the  Thomas  family  who  were  poisoned  some  time  ago.  The 
statements  and  advertisements  of  the  Royal  Baking  Powder 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  27 

Company  that  I  stated  that  they  (the  Thomas  family) 
were  poisoned  by  alum  in  baking  powder  is  false.  I  never 
made  any  such  statement.  Mr.  La  Fetra,  the  agent  of  the 
Royal  Baking  Powder  Company,  called  on  me  and  asked  me 
if  I  would  state  that  the  poisoning  was  alum  poisoning,  and 
I  told  him  I  would  not.  They  have  in  their  advertisements  mis- 
quoted me  and  have  made  false  statements  in  regard  to  the 
matter,  as  the  symptoms  were  arsenical  poisoning  and  not 
alum. 

J.  B.  CRITCHFIELD. 
April  20,  1900. 

Such  lying  was  not  so  common  as  a  more  subtle  de- 
ception. A  typical  form  of  "  reading  notice  "  was  to  speak 
of  alum  as  a  poison,  and  then  add  suggestively :  "  Recently 
in  New  York  two  deaths  occurred  from  poisoning  by  the 
use  of  powders  sent  to  victims  in  samples."  This  does  not 
say  that  the  powders  were  alum,  and,  so  far  as  I  can  learn, 
the  only  two  deaths  that  occurred  in  this  way  at  about  that 
time  were  those  of  Barnett  and  Mrs.  Adams,  for  whose 
murder  Molineux  was  tried  and  acquitted ;  and  Kutnow  and 
bromo-seltzer  were  the  powders  alleged  to  have  been  used 
on  them. 

Such  methods  are  corruption:  not  in  law,  not  in  busi- 
ness ;  "  seeing  "  a  chemist  and  getting  him  "  to  change 
his  mind  "  and  give  "  something  that  will  answer  a  pur- 
pose," would  be  "  fraud  "  and  "  pull  "  in  politics ;  in 
business  it  is  only  a  "  trick  of  the  trade."  Printing  lies 
is  "  faking,"  when  the  newspaper  itself  does  it ;  but  to  do 
it  for  a  big  advertiser  is  a  common  practice  of  every-day 
business.  It  pays,  and  what  pays  is  right.  In  the  years 


28       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

preceding  the  formation  of  the  trust,  the  Royal  company, 
capitalized  at  $160,000,  made  profits  which  rose  from 
$17,647,  in  1876,  to  $725,162,  in  1887.  In  other  words, 
the  income  in  1887  was  more  than  four  times  the  capital, 
and  the  largest  item  of  expense  was  for  advertising,  which 
ran  up  from  $17,647,  in  1876,  to  $291,084,  in  1887.  As 
the  Hoaglands  swore :  "  The  great  value  of  the  property, 
estimated  at  millions  of  dollars,  consists  not  in  goods,  nor 
in  factories,  nor  in  substantial  assets,  but  in  the  good-will 
and  popularity  of  its  name  and  trade-mark."  In  short,  as 
I  said  before,  in  a  capitalization  of  twenty  millions,  eight- 
een represented  a  "  general  impression  "  that  "  alum  was 
bad  "  and  that  cream  of  tartar  was  "  the  best." 

But  this  was  not  enough.  One  year's  profits  of  a  million 
and  a  half  were  made  on  only  twenty  per  cent,  of  the  bak- 
ing-powder business.  If  they  could  get  the  other  eighty 
per  cent.,  they  could  make  six  and  one-half  millions  a  year. 
And  why  not?  Alum  had  not  been  driven  out  of  the  trade; 
it  made  gains  steadily.  The  Royal  had  to  keep  up  its 
fight.  As  Mr.  Hoagland  said :  "  A  subtle  tenure  hangs 
upon  its  continued  success  (sic)  which  can  be  maintained 
only  by  the  most  unique  and  peculiar  abilities,  by  the  most 
cunning  tact  and  long  experience."  Since,  then,  they  had 
to  fight  for  life,  why  not  fight  for  a  monopoly?  Ziegler 
was  for  entirely  driving  alum  out  of  use. 

How?  By  legislation.  But  success  would  cost  the  con- 
sumer thirty  millions  a  year.  The  consumer  is  the  people, 
and  legislators  are  representatives  of  the  people.  No  mat- 
ter. The  representatives  of  the  people  must  use  the  power 
of  the  people  to  build  up  a  trust  by  compelling  the  people 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  29 

to  use  only  trust  baking-powder.  Impossible?  Not  at  all. 
Legislation  favorable  to  the  Royal  has  been  enacted  or 
offered  in  twenty-four  States  of  the  Union !  How  the  trust 
worked  in  all  these  States  I  do  not  know.  Ziegler  charged 
the  Hoaglands  with  having  "  paid  money  to  influence 
legislators  in  the  Legislature  of  the  State  (of  New  York) 
and  paid  the  same  out  of  the  funds  of  the  company."  I 
don't  know  about  New  York.  I  must  go  by  the  experience 
of  Missouri,  and,  while  Attorney-General  Crow  charges 
Ziegler  with  bribery  out  there,  all  I  can  prove  is  that 
bribes  were  paid  in  the  interest  of  the  Royal.  Besides, 
direct  bribery  by  a  captain  of  industry  himself  is  not 
typical,  and  it  is  the  typical  that  we  want  to  understand. 
This  commercial  concern  went  into  politics,  and  it  applied 
to  the  politics  of  Missouri  those  "  peculiar  abilities  "  and 
the  "  cunning  tact  "  which  we  know  and  which  we  see  have 
met  the  supreme  test  of  business — success.  Now  we  can 
see  what  business  methods  look  like  in  politics. 

Ziegler  becomes  a  mere  shadow.  Corrupt  Royal  agents 
do  the  work.  One  of  these  was  Daniel  J.  Kelly,  publisher  of 
the  American  Queen.  Kelly  organized,  in  1890,  the  Na- 
tional Health  Society,  a  "  fake  "  as  to  national  member- 
ship; just  like  fake  political  organizations.  "  Pure  food  " 
is  the  Royal's  platform,  and  Kelly  made  pure  food  his 
hobby.  "  I  have  made  a  study  of  the  subject,"  he  said  in 
an  affidavit  submitted  to  the  United  States  Industrial  Com- 
mission. "  Such  time  as  I  have  had  free  from  the  demands 
of  my  publishing  business  I  have  largely  devoted  .  . 
to  furthering  the  passage  of  pure-food  bills  in  the  various 
States.  For  the  past  two  or  three  years  my  attacks  .  .  . 


30       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

have  been  largely  directed  against  alum  baking-powder, 
and  I  have  been  interested  in  the  movement  that  has  spread 
through  nearly  all  the  States  of  the  Union  in  favor  of 
pure-food  laws,  prohibiting  the  use  of  alum  baking-pow- 
ders on  the  ground  that  they  are  poisonous." 

To  follow  Kelly  through  "  nearly  all  the  States  of  the 
Union "  would  be  interesting,  but  Missouri's  experience 
was  probably  typical.  In  1899  a  bill  was  introduced  into 
the  legislature  of  that  State,  prohibiting  the  use  of  poisons 
in  food,  "  arsenic,  calomel,  bismuth,  ammonia  or  alum." 
"  Or  alum  "  was  the  point.  Missouri  is  an  alum  State ; 
$15,000,000  was  invested  there  in  the  alum  baking-powder 
industry,  which  was  one  of  the  largest  in  the  State  and 
represented  all  the  capital  and  all  the  enterprise  of  many 
of  its  citizens.  "  Or  alum  "  would  drive  them  out  of  busi- 
ness and  leave  a  foreign  trust  a  monopoly.  But  those 
legislators,  in  this  Democratic  State,  advanced  that  bill 
out  of  turn  and  passed  it,  without  a  hearing,  without 
notice,  in  secret.  And  the  alum  men  did  not  learn  till 
August  14,  that  after  August  17  they  could  not  continue 
in  business,  and  then  they  heard  of  the  law  by  accident. 

This  outrage  aroused  public  opinion,  and  the  alum  men 
prepared  a  repeal  bill  for  the  next  session,  two  years  later. 
Meanwhile,  however,  Kelly  and  the  National  Health  So- 
ciety extended  their  organization.  The  Health  Society  of 
Missouri  was  formed  and  the  founder  thereof  was  that 
"  friend  of  the  people,"  the  Hon.  William  J.  Stone,  ex- 
Governor  of  Missouri,  and  then  a  candidate  for  United 
States  Senator.  Now,  Stone  is  no  boodler.  He  and  Colonel 
Phelps,  after  a  long  political  friendship,  quarreled  once, 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  31 

and  Stone  called  Phelps  a  lobbyist.  "  Oh,"  said  Phelps, 
"  we  both  suck  eggs,  Stone  and  I,  but  Stone,  he  hides  the 
shells."  But  I  do  not  believe  that  Stone  handles  bribes. 
He  is  that  other  type,  the  orator  of  the  people  whose  stock 
in  trade  is  his  influence ;  "  an  embezzler  of  power  "  Folk 
called  him  once.  This  anti-trust  orator  was  hired  by  the 
trust  to  bring  action  under  the  trust's  "  or  alum  "  law 
against  his  fellow  citizens  and  thus  install  the  foreign  trust 
in  the  field  of  a  general  local  industry.  "  Ah,  but  he  acted 
as  a  lawyer."  Do  you  know  who  said  that?  None  other 
than  William  J.  Bryan,  arch-Democrat,  arch-friend  of 
the  people,  arch-foe  of  the  trust,  and  that  does  excuse  this 
political  treason — in  law  and  in  business.  I  asked  one  of 
Folk's  confessed  boodlers,  once,  whether,  if  he  had  it  all 
to  do  over  again,  he  would  boodle  again.  "  Yes,"  he  said 
thoughtfully,  "  but  I  would  study  law."  "  Why?  "  I  asked. 
"  So  as  I  could  take  fees  instead  of  bribes,"  he  said,  with- 
out humor.  In  other  words,  he  saw,  as  Bryan  saw,  and 
Stone  and  the  commercial  world  see,  that  what  is  boodling 
in  politics  is  business  in  the  practice  of  the  law.  And  the 
practice  of  law  is  business. 

When  the  alum  men's  repeal  bill  was  introduced  in  the 
session  of  1901,  Kelly's  plan  to  beat  it  was  laid.  Lieuten- 
ant-Governor  Lee,  who  has  told  the  story,  referred  the 
measure  to  a  picked  committee  which  was  to  have  a  hear- 
ing. The  Hon.  William  J.  Stone  was  to  appear  on  the 
trust  side,  but  not  for  the  trust.  There  was  no  hearing, 
but  Stone's  speech,  full  of  the  Royal  expert's  chemical 
facts,  in  the  Royal's  phraseology,  was  laid  on  the  desks 
of  the  members,  and  this  is  the  way  it  begins : 


32       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

"  I  appear  before  you  on  the  request  of  the  Health 
Society  of  Missouri.  This  association  is  composed  of  a 
number  of  people — good  people,  both  men  and  women — 
living  in  different  parts  of  the  State,  with  headquarters  in 
St.  Louis."  There  was  no  such  society.  The  "  number  " 
was  three.  They  were  not  "  good  people,"  not  "  both  men 
and  women  " ;  they  were  Stone,  his  son,  and  one  other 
man.  And  the  headquarters  in  St.  Louis  was  in  the  safe 
of  Stone's  law  office. 

And  this  is  a  United  States  Senator !  The  Democrats  of 
Missouri  have  sent  him  to  Washington  to  do  battle  there 
for  the  "  good  people,  both  men  and  women,"  against  the 
Republican  representatives  of  the  Octopus.  Well,  we  also 
are  bound  for  Washington  and  we'll  be  interested  chiefly 
in  the  Republican  Senatorial  traitors,  but  we  shall  meet 
Stone  there,  too,  and  an  introduction  to  a  Democrat  or 
two  may  help  us.  Let  us  turn  now  to  an  honest  boodler, 
the  Hon.  John  A.  Lee,  and  hear  how  the  "  little  alum  fel- 
lows' "  repeal  bill  was  killed  in  1901,  and  how  again,  in 
1903,  in  the  session  which  elected  Stone  United  States 
Senator,  it  was  beaten. 

"  When  I  was  elected  Lieutenant-Governor  in  1900," 
Lee  says,  "  I  was  entirely  unfamiliar  with  the  ways  of 
legislation.  The  Royal  Baking  Powder  Company  had  been 
doing  extensive  advertising  in  the  paper  with  which  I  was 
connected.  I  have  known  Daniel  J.  Kelly  for  some  years 
and  he  has  been  ostensibly  my  friend.  In  the  beginning 
of  the  session  of  1901,  I  made  no  secret  of  the  fact 
that  it  was  my  desire  to  defeat  the  repeal  of  the  (anti-) 
alum  law. 


FOLK'S    FIGHT   FOR    MISSOURI  33 

"  One  day  Senator  Farris  came  to  me  and  said  that 
it  ought  to  be  worth  a  good  deal  to  the  Royal  Baking 
Powder  Company  to  keep  the  anti-alum  law  on  the  statute 
books;  and  that  the  boys  on  the  committee  did  not  think 
that  they  ought  to  prevent  its  repeal  without  some  com- 
pensation. I  asked  him  what  the  boys  wanted.  He  said 
they  wanted  $1,000  apiece  for  six  of  the  committee,*  which 
was  all  of  the  committee  except  Senator  Dowdall,  and 
$1,000  for  the  Senator  who  introduced  the  bill.  Unfortu- 
nately for  me,  Kelly  called  me  up  over  the  long-distance 
telephone  from  New  York  that  same  day,  and  I  com- 
municated to  him  the  proposition  made  to  me  by  Farris. 
He  said  he  would  see  his  principal  and  wire  me  the  next 
day  whether  or  not  the  proposition  would  be  accepted.  I 
received  a  telegram  the  next  day  from  Kelly  stating  that 
the  proposition  was  agreeable.  This  telegram  I  gave  to 
Farris  in  Senator  Morton's  room,  who  was  ill  at  the  time. 
The  agreement  was  that  the  bill,  in  return  for  the  money 
to  be  paid  each  Senator,  would  be  killed  in  committee — 
that  is,  never  reported  from  the  committee.  The  committee 
did  keep  the  bill,  and  though  there  were  various  protests 
all  over  the  State  demanding  a  report  from  the  committee, 
none  was  made. 

"  I  have  since  learned  that  the  chairman  of  the  com- 
mittee, in  order  to  escape  the  pressure  being  brought  upon 
the  committee,  left  Jefferson  City  with  the  bill  in  his 
pocket,  not  returning  until  the  closing  day  of  the  session, 
and  that  the  report  of  the  committee  on  the  bill  was  filed 
by  the  chairman  after  the  session  adjourned,  and  the 
journal  falsified,  so  as  to  have  it  appear  that  the  report 


34       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

was  made  during  the  session  of  the  Senate  on  the  last  day. 
This  report  made  by  the  committee  on  the  bill  was  written 
in  New  York  and  sent  to  me  by  Kelly.  I  turned  it  over  to 
Farris,  and  this  report  was  made  a  report  of  the  com- 
mittee, I  believe,  without  any  change. 

"  On  February  28,  1901,  I  received  a  check  from  Kelly 
for  $8,500,  being  the  $7,000  for  the  seven  Senators 
mentioned  and  $1,500  for  myself.  On  March  19,  1901,  the 
day  after  the  adjournment  of  the  Legislature,  I  met 
Farris  by  appointment  at  the  Laclede  Hotel  and  settled 
with  him  and  his  associates  in  accordance  with  his  prop- 
osition. I  went  to  the  bank  and  drew  $7,000,  leaving 
$1,500  for  my  share,  went  to  Farris's  room,  and  there 
handed  the  money  to  Senator  Farris.  He  divided  the 
$7,000  into  seven  different  packages  or  envelopes.  While 
I  was  in  the  room  Senator  Mathews  and  Senator  Smith 
came  in,  and  to  each  of  these  Senator  Farris  gave  one  of 
the  packages.  The  $1,500  was  to  go  to  me,  and  was  used 
by  me  in  a  trade  paper. 

"  Just  prior  to  the  last  session  (1903)  Kelly  sent  for 
me  to  come  to  the  Planters'  Hotel.  I  went  to  his  room, 
found  Senator  Farris  there,  and  Kelly  told  me  in  the  pres- 
ence of  Farris  that  he  had  $15,000  for  the  Senators  to 
defeat  the  repeal  of  the  alum  law  of  this  session,  and  that 
$1,000  was  for  me.  I  told  him  I  could  not  take  it.  He 
communicated  with  me  at  various  other  times,  that  he  had 
$1,000  for  me  in  return  for  what  I  should  do  for  him,  etc., 
but  I  was  determined  to  take  no  more  money  in  that  way, 
and  refused.  Finally,  it  seems  he  sent  for  my  brother  and 
gave  him  a  check  for  $1,000,  telling  him  to  give  it  to  me, 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  35 

tendering  it  as  payment  to  me  for  my  official  in- 
fluence." 

Poor  Lee!  The  miserable  bribe-taker  is  disgraced  and 
abandoned.  He  might  have  been  Governor.  The  alum 
people  were  for  him  in  the  last  session;  he  had  promised 
them  a  fair  committee,  and  he  hoped  not  to  have  to  vote 
himself.  But  Senator  Farris  was  against  him,  and  Farris 
arranged  it  so  that,  when  the  measure  came  up,  there  was 
a  tie  in  the  Senate.  At  the  close  of  the  roll,  when  the 
clerk  turned  to  the  chair  for  the  deciding  vote,  Farris  rose 
in  his  place.  The  chamber  was  still ;  everybody  was  aware 
that  a  weak  boodler  "  wanted  to  reform,"  and  that  the 
"  game  was  to  show  him  up."  Lee  hesitated. 

"  Mr.  President,"  said  Farris,  pointing  his  finger  at 
Lee,  "  we  are  waiting  for  you." 

"  Nay,"  Lee  voted,  in  a  whisper,  and  the  trust  was  left 
in  control  for  two  years  more. 

Even  then  Lee's  hopes  were  not  dead,  nor  his  chances. 
But  he  "  peached  "  and  that  ended  Lee.  He  is  a  traitor — 
to  the  System. 

But  what  of  the  captain  of  industry?  What  of  the 
Royal  Baking  Powder  Company,  what  of  the  Gould  rail- 
roads, what  of  the  breweries?  What  of  Ellis  Wainwright 
and  George  J.  Kobusch  and  John  Scullen?  What  of  all 
the  rest  of  the  big  business  men  ?  They  are  the  sources  of 
our  political  corruption.  What  of  the  System  back  of 
the  corrupt  rings?  That  is  the  sustenance  of  our  political 
degradation.  Ellis  Wainwright,  a  fugitive  from  justice, 
dines  in  Paris  with  the  American  Ambassador,  who  is 
negotiating  a  treaty  for  the  extradition  of  bribers.  A 


36       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

group  of  the  ablest  criminal  lawyers  in  New  York,  at  a 
hearing  before  Governor  Odell  at  Albany,  could  not  speak 
of  John  A.  Lee  without  twisting  their  faces  into  ludicrous 
scorn;  but  they  were  defending  William  Ziegler  from  ex- 
tradition to  Missouri.  And  John  Scullen ! — I  cited  once, 
as  an  example  of  the  shamelessness  of  St.  Louis,  the  fact 
that  Turner,  the  State's  witness  in  the  boodle  cases,  was 
still  president  of  his  trust  company.  When  I  returned  to 
the  city,  some  honest  business  men  told  me  triumphantly 
that  Turner  had  had  to  resign. 

"  Is  John  Scullen  still  a  director  of  the  World's  Fair?  " 
I  asked. 

He  was,  they  said.  "  Then  why  has  Turner  been 
punished?"  I  inquired.  "Was  it  because  he  boodled,  or 
because  he  was  a  traitor  to  the  System  and  peached?  " 

"  Because  he  peached,  I  guess,"  was  the  answer,  and 
there  lies  the  bitter  truth.  There  is  no  public  opinion  to 
punish  the  business  boodler,  and  that  is  why  Joseph  W. 
Folk  had  to  go  into  politics  and  run  for  Governor  out  in 
the  State  with  "  boodle  "  for  the  sole  issue.  He  is  laying 
down  as  a  political  platform  the  doctrine  of  the  new  patriot- 
ism :  that  corruption  is  treason ;  that  the  man  who,  elected 
to  maintain  the  institutions  of  a  government  by  the  people, 
sells  them  out,  is  a  traitor;  whether  he  be  a  constable,  a 
legislator,  a  judge,  or  a  boss,  his  act  is  not  alone  bribery, 
but  treason.  Folk's  appeal  is  to  the  politician,  the  people, 
and  the  business  man,  all  three,  and  there  is  hope  in  all 
three.  The  politician  is  not  without  patriotic  sentiment : 
Ed  Butler  does  not  mean  harm  to  his  country;  he  is  only 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  37 

trying  to  make  money  at  his  business.  And  as  for  the 
business  man 

One  night,  at  a  banquet  of  politicians,  I  was  seated 
beside  a  man  who  had  grown  rich  by  unswerving  loyalty 
to  a  corrupt  ring — "  the  party  organization,"  he  would 
have  called  it — which  had  done  more  permanent  harm  to 
his  country  than  a  European  army  could  do  in  two  wars. 
He  was  not  a  politician,  but  a  business  man ;  not  a  boodler, 
but  the  backer  of  boodlers,  and  his  conversation  was  a 
defense  of  "  poor  human  nature,"  till  the  orchestra  struck 
up  a  patriotic  air.  That  moved  him  deeply. 

"  Isn't  it  beautiful ! "  he  exclaimed ;  and  when  the 
boodlers  joined  in  the  chorus,  he  murmured,  "  Beautiful, 
beautiful,"  then  leaned  over  and  with  tears  in  his  eyes  he 
said: 

"  Ah,  but  the  tune  for  me,  the  song  I  love,  is  *  My 
Country,  'tis  of  Thee.'  " 

I  believe  this  man  thinks  he  is  patriotic.  I  believe  H. 
O.  Havemeyer  thinks  his  success  is  success,  not  one  kind 
of  success,  but  success,  not  alone  his,  but  public  "  pros- 
perity." And  William  Ziegler,1  who  is  spending  millions 
to  plant  the  American  flag  first  at  the  North  Pole,  I  am 
sure  he  regards  himself  as  a  peculiarly  patriotic  American 
— and  he  is.  They  all  are,  according  to  their  light,  hon- 
orable men  and  patriotic  citizens.  They  simply  do  not 
know  what  patriotism  is.  They  know  what  treason  is  in 
war;  it  is  going  over  to  the  enemy,  like  Benedict  Arnold, 
and  fighting  in  the  open  against  your  country.  In  peace 
i  William  Ziegler  died  in  1905;  but  the  type  still  lives. 


38       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

and  in  secret  to  seize,  not  forts  but  cities  and  States,  and 
destroy,  not  buildings  and  men,  but  the  fundamental  in- 
stitutions of  your  country  and  the  saving  character  of 
American  manhood — that  is  not  treason,  that  is  politics, 
and  politics  is  business,  and  business,  you  know,  is  business. 

"  Do  you  really  call  it  wrong  to  buy  a  switch?  "  asked 
a  St.  Louis  business  man.  "  Even  if  it  is  necessary  to  your 
business  ?  " 

"  Say,"  said  a  politician,  "  if  a  rich  mogul  comes  along 
and  shakes  his  swag  in  your  face  and  asks  for  a  switch 
that  he  has  a  right  to  get,  because  he  needs  it  in  his  busi- 
ness, wouldn't  you  grab  off  a  piece?  On  the  level,  now, 
wouldn't  you?  " 

They  answer  each  other,  these  two,  and  each  can  judge 
the  other,  but  neither  can  see  himself  as  he  is  or  the  enor- 
mity of  his  crime.  And  "  that  man  Folk,"  rising  out  of 
the  wrecked  machinery  of  justice  in  Missouri,  may  lead 
his  people  to  see  that  the  corruption  of  their  government 
is  not  merely  corruption,  but  a  revolutionary  process  mak- 
ing for  a  new  form  of  government;  and  the  people  of 
Missouri,  rising  out  of  the  wrecked  machinery  of  the 
government  of  Missouri,  may  teach  their  politicians  a 
lesson  in  liberty  and  honor.  But  that  is  not  enough.  That 
will  reach  neither  the  source  nor  the  head  of  the  evil.  Some 
power  greater  than  Folk,  greater  than  that  of  the  people 
of  Missouri,  must  rise  to  bring  home  to  the  captain  of  in- 
dustry the  truth:  That  business,  important  as  it  is,  is  not 
sacred;  that  not  everything  that  pays  is  right;  that,  if 
bribery  is  treason,  if  the  corrupt  politician  is  a  traitor, 
then  the  corrupting  business  man  is  an  enemy  of  the  re- 


FOLK'S    FIGHT    FOR    MISSOURI  39 

public.  No  matter  how  many  bonds  he  may  float  in  war, 
or  how  much  he  may  give  for  charity  and  education,  if 
he  corrupts  the  sources  of  law  and  of  justice,  his  business 
is  not  success,  but — treason,  and  his  own  and  a  people's 
failure.2 

2  Mr.  Folk  was  elected  Governor.  For  the  first  time  in  its  history 
Democratic  Missouri  went  Republican  for  President;  and  Roosevelt 
carried  Republicans  into  all  the  State  offices — excepting  that  of 
Governor.  It  was  hard  to  split  tickets  in  Missouri,  but  St.  Louis 
and  Missouri  did  it  for  Folk. 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL   TO    ILLINOIS 

SHOWING  HOW,  SINCE  THE  CORRUPTION  OF  A  STATE 
AND    ITS    CITIES    IS    ALL    ONE    SYSTEM,    MU- 
NICIPAL  REFORM   MUST   INCLUDE 
STATE    REFORM 
(August,  1904) 

MISSOURI  was  a  Democratic  State.  Illinois  is  Repub- 
lican. "  Graft  "  knows  no  politics,  but  the  "  good  citizen  " 
does.  To  the  grafter  a  party  is  but  a  tool  of  his  trade, 
and  the  party  to  which  a  ma j  ority  of  the  citizens  "  be- 
long "  is  his  party.  He  does  not  belong  to  it ;  it  belongs 
to  him.  The  result  is  that  neither  of  our  great  parties 
truly  represents  us;  both  stand  to-day  for  graft.  They 
differ  upon  other,  unessential  things ;  they  are  alike  in  this, 
that  whichever  is  in  power  is  the  grafter's  party.  Now, 
wherever  we  have  gone,  we  have  found  that  the  biggest 
grafter  is  Big  Business,  and  Big  Business  kept  changing 
its  party  to  be  of  the  majority.  After  Missouri  I  visited 
three  Republican  States — Ohio,  New  York,  and  Illinois. 
The  railroad  that  took  me  into  Illinois  turned  Republican 
at  the  State  line.  The  Royal  Baking  Powder  Company, 
which  had  dealt  with  the  Democrats  in  Missouri,  appeared 
in  New  York  with  the  Republicans.  So  with  the  American 
Book  Company — in  Missouri  a  Democrat,  at  home  in  Ohio 
it  is  a  Republican.  And  so  it  goes  in  national  politics. 
Wall  Street,  and  all  that  "Wall  Street"  connotes,  was 

40 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          41 

Republican  till  President  Roosevelt,  refusing  to  acknowl- 
edge the  privilege  of  capital,  enforced  the  law  against 
a  combination  of  railroads.  Then  Wall  Street  began  plot- 
ting with  the  Republican  leaders  for  the  nomination  of  a 
"  safe  man  "  for  President,  and,  when  that  "  safe  man  " 
died,  looked  to  the  Democrats — looked  with  its  great 
campaign  contribution  for  a  bribe — and  corrupt  Dem- 
ocratic leaders,  itching  for  the  great  financial  graft,  began 
its  search  for  a  "  safe  man." 

If  the  good  citizen  would  do  as  the  corrupt  politician 
and  the  corrupting  business  man  do,  shift  freely  from  one 
party  to  the  other  as  the  change  served  his  interest,  then 
both  parties  would  represent  good  citizenship.  They  would 
differ — more  than  they  do  now — on  broad  questions  of 
public  policy,  but  they  would  both  stand,  as  they  do  not 
now,  for  the  public  interest.  But  the  good  citizen  is  "  loyal 
to  party."  Half  the  loyalty  that  is  betrayed  by  parties 
would,  if  devoted  to  the  State  and  the  nation,  save  the  coun- 
try and  the  parties,  too!  Such  independence,  however, 
would  mean  non-partisanship  in  State  and  national  politics, 
and  the  good  citizen  is  only  just  learning,  with  many  a 
qualm  of  conscience,  to  vote  independently  in  municipal 
elections.  In  State  and  national  politics  he  votes  too  con- 
stantly, not  for  his  State  and  the  United  States,  but  for 
"  his  party."  Hence  his  party  can  deliver  his  vote.  Hence 
his  party  does  deliver  his  vote  in  Ohio,  New  York,  and 
Illinois,  as  in  Missouri — to  all  comers  with  "  pulls  "  and 
bribes. 

This  is  serious,  since  we  realized,  in  Missouri,  that 
"  bribery  and  corruption  "  are  not  accidental  and  occa- 


42       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

sional,  but  general  and  deliberate.  I  quoted  the  declaration 
made  in  open  court  by  Judge  Priest,  one  of  the  leaders 
of  the  Missouri  bar,  that  bribery,  at  the  most,  is  a  "  con- 
ventional crime."  And  he  was  right.  Bribery  out  there  was 
"  a  custom  of  the  country,"  and  political  corruption  was 
a  system.  And  this  system,  laid  wide  open  by  Joseph  W. 
Folk,  proved  to  be,  not  an  evil  of  government,  but  the 
government  itself.  Corruption  had  worked  a  revolution 
there.  The  representative  democracy  described  in  the  State 
constitution  of  Missouri  was  a  thing  of  paper.  Drawn  by 
dead  men,  it  was  dead.  In  its  stead  stood  a  reorganization 
of  society,  a  commercial  oligarchy,  a  government  of  spe- 
cial, not  of  common,  interests ;  and  this,  the  actual,  govern- 
ment of  this  great  State,  was  not  a  creation  of  paper  and 
ink ;  you  could  not  study  it  in  the  State  library.  We  traced 
its  superstructure  in  the  crimes,  the  indictments,  and  the 
confessions  of  living  men,  and  we  saw  that  its  foundation 
was  laid,  true  and  nice,  upon  the  exact  adjustment  of  the 
sordid  ambitions  of  the  political  leaders  of  Missouri  to 
the  financial  lusts  of  her  captains  of  industry. 

Political  corruption,  then,  is  a  force  by  which  a  repre- 
sentative democracy  is  transformed  into  an  oligarchy 
representative  of  special  interests,  and  the  medium  of  the 
revolution  is  the  party. 

So  we  must  recognize  parties  and  take  up  next  a  Re- 
publican State — Illinois.  Illinois  is  not  so  demonstrably 
corrupt  as  Missouri.  Other  Republican  States  are  worse, 
but  these  two  offer  just  now  a  remarkable  parallel,  super- 
ficially in  this,  that  at  the  same  time  Joseph  W.  Folk,  the 
Democratic  Circuit  Attorney  who  had  "  done  his  duty  " 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          43 

in  St.  Louis,  was  running  for  the  Democratic  nomination 
for  Governor  of  Democratic  Missouri,  Charles  S.  Deneen, 
the  Republican  State's  Attorney  (the  same  office),  who 
had  "  done  his  duty  "  in  Chicago,  was  running  for  the  Re- 
publican nomination  for  Governor  of  Republican  Illinois. 
There  are  many  unessential  differences,  and  we  shall  note 
them  as  we  go  along,  but  fundamentally  the  parallel  is 
still  more  striking  and  significant  in  this,  that  while  the 
Democrats  of  Missouri  were  being  asked  to  take  back  from 
Democratic  boodlers  the  control  of  their  party,  the  Re- 
publicans of  Illinois  were  being  asked  to  take  back  from 
Republican  boodlers  the  control  of  their  party.  Boodle 
was  the  issue  in  both  campaigns ;  boodle  is  the  underlying 
issue  in  most  American  political  campaigns,  but  here  it 
was  a  party  issue.  Politicians,  anxious  to  preserve  their 
parties,  have  always  pleaded  for  "  reform  within  the 
party."  Well,  here  we  have  it.  Here  we  have  the  fighting 
done  within  the  party,  and  that  is  right.  For  parties  do 
rule  us,  and  if  American  citizens  will  "  stick  to  party," 
then  it  is  important  for  all  of  us  to  know  what  each  party 
decides  within  itself  to  represent:  all  of  us  or  a  few  of 
us,  the  common  interests  which  ask  for  nothing  but  law, 
order,  and  fair  play,  and  pay  for  these  in  taxes  that  sus- 
tain the  State ;  or  those  special  interests  which  seek  special 
favors  and  pay  for  them  in  bribes  which  corrupt  the  State. 
Folk  began  the  movement  which  his  candidacy  is  bring- 
ing to  a  logical  conclusion.  Deneen  did  not.  This  does 
not  matter.  We  are  interested  not  in  the  men,  but  in  the 
issue  for  which  they  stand,  and  the  issue  arose  in  both 
States  in  the  same  way — in  a  fight  for  municipal  reform 


44       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

and  the  failure  to  get  it.  Fortunate  failure !  "  Municipal 
reform "  is  a  mean  ideal.  We  have  talked  about  it  for 
years  now,  till  it  has  come  to  be  the  highest  aim  of  Ameri- 
can citizenship.  But  think  of  it  for  a  moment:  It  is  not 
the  cities  alone  that  are  corrupt,  but  the  States  also  and 
the  United  States,  and  we  all  know  that  this  is  so.  Yet 
we  of  the  cities  say,  "  Give  us  good  government  in  the 
cities  where  we  live,  and  the  States  and  the  United  States 
may  go  to  the  deuce."  It  is  a  mistake.  It  is  more  than 
a  mistake.  Municipal  reform,  all  by  itself,  is  impossible. 
City  government  and  State  government  are  of  one  sov- 
ereignty, and,  as  for  corruption,  the  city  and  the  State  are 
in  one  system,  and  the  city  man  and  the  "  up-State  "  man 
have  to  work  together  to  get  what  each  needs. 

The  big  grafter  knows  this ;  there  is  nothing  narrow 
and  "  provincial "  about  him,  and  Folk  and  the  Chicago 
reformers  got  over  their  municipal  narrowness  by  follow- 
ing the  big  grafter.  They  started  right.  They  did  not 
begin  their  reform  by  passing  and  enforcing  laws  to 
make  other  people  good.  They  saw  early  that  the  "  best 
citizens  "  were  the  worst  grafters,  and  they  went  after 
them  and  the  municipal  legislators  who  were  selling  out 
to  them.  Folk's  method  was  that  of  the  criminal  prosecutor, 
and  he  put  the  municipal  bribe-givers  and  bribe-takers  on 
trial,  and  when  they  appealed  to  the  State  courts,  the 
pursuit  into  the  State  taught  the  Circuit  Attorney  of 
St.  Louis  that  boodling  was  not  a  crime  of  city  individuals, 
but  the  established  method  of  conducting  public  business 
in  both  city  and  State.  Boodle  was  a  question  of  govern- 
ment, and  Mr.  Folk,  in  order  to  finish  his  job,  had  to  go 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          45 

into  politics,  and  he  went  into  politics.  Declaring  boodle 
to  be  the  issue  in  both  city  and  State,  he  appealed  to  the 
people. 

The  Chicago  reformers  went  into  politics  at  the  first 
plunge.  The  system  that  confronted  them  was  like  that 
of  St.  Louis ;  it  was  the  typical  form  of  municipal  govern- 
ment in  all  unreformed  American  cities.  The  citizens  were 
divided  between  two  parties.  These  parties  were  organized 
by  two  groups  of  "  leaders  " :  Robert  E.  Burke,  John 
Powers,  Mayor  John  P.  Hopkins,  and  Roger  C.  Sullivan, 
"Democrats";  and  William  Lorimer,  "Doc"  T.  N. 
Jamieson,  James  Pease,  et  al,  "  Republicans."  (Others 
there  were,  but  those  named  are  active  to-day.)  They  had 
a  rough  working  agreement  by  which  the  Democrats  took 
the  city,  the  Republicans  Cook  County,  and  these  govern- 
ments they  ran  "  for  the  good  of  the  party."  That  was 
their  highest  spoken  sentiment — not  the  good  of  the  com- 
munity, but  of  the  party,  and  the  good  of  the  party  came 
to  mean  the  good  of  the  leaders  and  their  friends.  They 
and  their  friends  were  in  politics  for  "  what  there  was  in 
it  for  them."  Thus  the  government  of  Chicago  and  Cook 
County  was  not  a  government  in  the  interest  of  the  people. 

The  followers  of  the  two  groups  of  leaders,  operating 
like  bandits,  held  up  citizens  and  robbed  them,  just  as  train 
robbers  and  brigands  do.  Everybody  had  to  pay  for  every- 
thing, lawful  and  unlawful;  taxpayers  had  to  help  the 
tax-collector  defraud  the  city,  and  shared  with  him  the 
"  reduction  " ;  merchants  paid  to  violate  ordinances ;  con- 
tractors to  be  freed  from  inspections ;  health  board  super- 
vision was  largely  blackmail;  and  the  police  operated  a 


46       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

system  such  as  that  which  we  found  exposed  in  Minneap- 
olis. The  police  of  Chicago  did  not  protect  life  and 
property;  they  protected  the  criminals;  they  licensed 
burglars  and  hold-up  men  by  districts,  guarded  them  while 
at  work,  and  shared  in  their  booty. 

Now  this  is  preposterous,  but  this  is  not  the  worst.  This 
is  crime,  and  if,  when  they  had  committed  their  crimes, 
the  criminals  had  run  away,  all  might  have  been  well.  But 
these  were  not  private  robbers,  they  were  public  plunderers  ; 
they  not  only  robbed  the  citizens,  they  plundered  the  city. 
And  they  not  only  plundered  the  city  and  county  once  or 
twice,  they  operated  methodically  and  systematically.  And, 
they  not  only  stayed  by  the  loot,  they  stayed  as  judges, 
legislators,  and  executives.  They  were  the  government, 
and  they  sold  the  law,  they  rotted  the  sources  of  the  law, 
they  gave  away  public  property,  and  they  carried  off  the 
self-respect  of  the  citizens  of  Chicago.  For  hold-up  men 
and  vulgar  criminals  were  not  the  only  "  friends  "  of  the 
leaders.  Their  circle  included  some  of  the  leading  citizens 
of  the  city.  All  men  who  were  against  the  law  were  with 
the  party  rings;  all  men  whose  interests  ran  counter  to 
the  public  interests  were  satisfied  customers  of  this  traffic 
in  a  people.  Thus,  though  boodle  was  all  that  the  poli- 
ticians were  after,  their  business  was  the  sale  of  privileges ; 
and  the  effect  of  the  establishment  of  that  business  as  the 
actual  government,  was  to  transform  the  representative 
democracy  of  Chicago  into  an  oligarchy — representative 
of  privileged  classes. 

Nor  is  this  all.  The  classes  favored  were:  first,  those 
who — like  pickpockets,  hold-up  men,  gamblers,  and  keepers 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          47 

of  saloons  and  bawdy  houses — wanted  to  break  the  law; 
second,  those  who — like  tax-dodgers,  railroads,  and  estab- 
lished big  businesses — wanted  to  evade  the  law ;  and  third, 
those  who — like  traction,  gas,  and  other  public  utility 
companies — wanted  to  abuse  general  and  procure  and  mis- 
use special  laws.  In  other  words,  boodle  and  graft,  the 
"  evils  "  happy  pessimists  speak  of  so  lightly,  had  turned 
the  city  government  of  Chicago  into  an  oligarchy  of  the 
worst  citizens,  of  the  enemies  of  the  city. 

The  Chicago  reformers  attacked  the  third  form  of 
corruption,  that  of  active  boodling  for  franchises  and 
other  special  ordinances.  As  I  have  pointed  out  in  "  The 
Shame  of  the  Cities,"  there  are  two  main  roads  to  reform. 
One  goes  down  among  the  vulgar  criminal  classes  to  the 
correction  of  obvious  police  scandals,  and  leads  to  what 
we  call  "  good  government."  This  is  easily  achieved.  Min- 
neapolis got  it  in  a  summer.  New  York  has  fought  longer 
for  it,  but  has  it  at  last — from  Tammany  Hall !  The  other 
road  takes  the  reformer  higher  up  among  his  own  friends 
through  high  finance  to  higher  politics,  and  leads,  when 
successful,  to  an  awakened  public  opinion  against  corrupt 
misrepresentation  in  government — to  what  I  call  self- 
government.  Chicago's  Municipal  Voters'  League  had 
every  incentive  to  fight  for  "  good  government."  The  city 
had  police  graft  and  administrative  abuses  as  bad  as  any 
Minneapolis  or  New  York  ever  had.  But  John  H.  Ham- 
line,  William  Kent,  and  other  young  men  who  were  serv- 
ing as  aldermen,  and  the  best  of  the  newspapers,  advised 
the  League  to  strike  at  the  council,  and  George  E.  Cole 
and  his  associates  struck  at  the  council.  And  when  they 


48       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

struck  there  they  struck  the  trail  we  traveled  with  Folk 
from  St.  Louis,  the  trail  that  runs  between  the  two  great 
parallels,  business  and  politics,  out  of  the  city,  up  through 
the  State  to  the  United  States. 

The  council  was  the  heart  of  the  corrupt  system  of 
Chicago.  The  aldermen,  supposedly  elected  to  represent 
the  city,  but  really  chosen  by  the  leaders  of  the  two  parties, 
were  selling  out  the  city.  Peter  Dunne  ("  Mr.  Doo- 
ley"),  a  reporter  in  those  days,  described  many  of  the 
members  as  criminals  marked  by  nature  as  such.  Two- 
thirds  of  them  were  organized  into  a  bipartisan  "  com- 
bine," which  operated  under  the  direction  of  a  "  good 
business  man,"  Martin  B.  Madden,  president  of  the 
Western  Stone  Company.  "  I  rounded  up  the  boys,"  said 
Johnnie  Powers  [Democrat],  "  and  Madden  [Republican] 
he  told  'em  what  for."  There  we  have  the  linking  of  the  two 
rings,  political  and  financial.  Back  of  the  Democrats  in 
the  "  combine  "  were  the  party  bosses — "  Bobbie  "  Burke, 
Mayor  Hopkins,  and  Roger  Sullivan,  and  back  of  the  Re- 
publicans were  the  Republican  bosses — Billy  Lorimer, 
"  Doc  "  Jamieson,  Pease,  and  others.  Lorimer,  Jamieson 
and  Company  did  not  direct  or  share  in  the  bribery  of  Re- 
publican aldermen.  The  city  council  was  not  a  Republican 
graft;  the  Republicans,  as  I  explained,  had  the  county. 
But  just  as  the  Republican  sheriff,  in  return  for  non- 
interference by  the  Democratic  police  in  his  horse-racing 
graft,  let  the  police  alone  in  vice  graft,  so  for  general 
immunity  from  all  hindrances  in  their  county  contracts, 
the  Republican  leaders  delivered  over  to  the  Democrats  the 
Republican  aldermen  to  vote  with  the  "  combine "  that 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          49 

sold  out  municipal  legislation.  This  was  the  bipartisan 
political  system  back  of  the  corrupt  council. 

In  front  of  the  council  were  two  financial  rings.  One 
of  these  was  intact  when  I  began  my  study  of  Illinois ;  this 
is  the  ring  which  centers  in  the  Chicago  National  Bank — 
John  R.  Walsh,  president.1  Walsh  is  a  Democrat.  He  is 
the  owner  of  the  Democratic  party  organ,  The  Chronicle, 
and  the  power  behind  the  throne  of  the  Democratic  bosses. 
The  power  behind  the  throne  of  the  Republican  bosses  is 
John  M.  Smyth,  the  head  of  one  of  Chicago's  "  big  stores." 
Smyth  (Republican)  is  a  director  of  the  bank  of  Walsh 
(Democrat),  and  its  former  cashier,  now  vice-president,  is 
Fred  M.  Blount,  an  active  Republican  politician. 

The  great  graft  of  the  Chicago  Republicans  is  public 
contracts,  and  they  control  the  sources  of  contracts — State 
and  county  boards  and,  through  judges  like  Hanecy,  and 
the  Governor,  park  'boards.  Lorimer  was  a  street-car 
driver,  but  in  politics  he  became  a  contractor  and  a  friend 
of  Walsh.  Walsh  is  treasurer  of  the  South  Park  Board; 
William  Best,  a  director  of  the  Chicago  National  Bank, 
is  a  member  of  the  board,  and  so  is  Lyman  A.  Walton, 
vice-president  of  (Walsh's)  Equitable  Trust  Company. 
Blount  has  been  treasurer  of  the  West  Park  Board  and  of 
the  Sanitary  Board.  The  latter  is  the  board  which  has 
spent  millions  to  reverse  the  Chicago  River,  and  make  it, 
the  city's  sewer,  run  out  of,  instead  of  into,  the  Lake. 
This  developed  a  water  power  which  the  board  once  pro- 
posed to  sell  to  a  private  corporation.  Thomas  M.  Smyth, 
a  relative  of  John  M.  Smyth,  is  an  ex-president  of  the 
i  Walsh  and  his  bank  failed  scandalously  this  year  (1906). 


50       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

board.  Contracts  from  all  these  boards  have  gone  some- 
times to  a  Democratic  firm  like  Lyden  &  Drews  (Lyden 
is  a  nephew  of  ex-Mayor  Hopkins),  more  often  to  a  Lori- 
mer  firm.  Walsh's  institutions  bond  public  officials  and 
public  officials  deposit  funds  in  his  institutions.  So  do 
many  of  the  politicians  and  sporting  people.  Other  banks 
share  in  all  this  "  legitimate  graft,"  of  course ;  the  Chicago 
National  group  does  not  get  it  all.  Here,  briefly  outlined, 
is  one  great  business  ring  which  profits  by,  is  satisfied 
with,  and  gives  financial  aid  and  moral  support  to,  the 
debased  political  system  of  the  city,  county,  and  State. 

The  other  ring,  now  broken,  was  that  of  which  the 
world-famous  promoter,  Charles  T.  Yerkes,  was  the  center. 
He  went  to  Chicago  as  a  representative  of  Widener  & 
Elkins,  the  street  railway  "  financiers  "  of  Philadelphia. 
He  bought  The  Inter  Ocean,  the  newspaper  organ  of  the 
"  stalwart "  Republicans,  and  became  a  financial  leader. 
He  banked  at  the  Illinois  Trust  and  Savings  Bank,  John 
J.  Mitchell,  president.  Now  Mitchell  is  to  Chicago  what 
J.  P.  Morgan  is  to  New  York.  But  when  Yerkes,  recog- 
nized and  beaten  by  Chicago,  organized  his  street  railway 
properties  to  leave  them,  the  financial  scheme  involved  a 
capitalization  which  could  only  be  floated  upon  the  theory 
that  a  new  franchise  was  obtainable,  and  upon  terms  which 
it  is  incredible  would  be  granted  by  an  honest  city  council ; 
yet  Mitchell  in  Chicago  and  Morgan  in  New  York  helped 
float  this  plan  for  the  Union  Traction  Company.  Such 
financial  cooperation  is  moral  support,  and  Yerkes  had  that 
from  Mitchell  and  from  other  banks ;  he  had  it  from  the 
financial  world  generally.  And  when  you  consider  the 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          51 

ramifications  of  influence  from  such  banks  in  both  rings, 
their  directors,  stockholders,  customers,  and  friends,  and 
from  associated  institutions,  companies,  and  businesses, 
you  can  begin  to  understand  what  upheld  the  Hopkins- 
Sullivan  Democrats,  the  Lorimer-Jamieson  Republicans,  the 
corrupt  city  council,  and  the  whole  rotten  system  of 
Chicago  graft.  What  I  have  given  is  but  a  superficial 
sketch  of  the  two  main  groups  of  those  respectable  powers 
which  the  Chicago  reformers  attacked  when  they  attacked 
the  Chicago  City  Council. 

In  1895,  when  the  Municipal  Voters'  League  began  its 
work,  these  financial  powers  had  big  plans  before  them. 
We  shall  follow  two  of  them.  The  People's  Gas  and  Coke 
Company  wanted  to  combine  all  the  Chicago  gas  companies 
and  make  a  monopoly.  The  Hopkins-Sullivan  Democrats, 
knowing  this,  had  put  through  the  council,  when  Hopkins 
was  mayor,  a  franchise  for  the  Ogden  Gas  Company.  The 
organizers  boast  that  they  paid  no  bribes,  but  why  should 
they  ?  In  the  deal  were  Martin  B.  Madden,  Johnnie  Powers, 
Thomas  Gahan,  Roger  Sullivan,  and  others.  Chicago  be- 
lieves Mayor  Hopkins  had  a  two-elevenths  interest,  but  I 
was  most  urgently  persuaded  to  think  that  he  had  not. 
Say  he  wasn't  in  the  deal.  His  crowd  was,  and  among  them 
were  the  politicians  who  sold  franchises  to  business  men; 
why  shouldn't  they  give  one  to  themselves?  The  scheme 
had  all  the  marks  of  what,  in  Pennsylvania,  would  be  called 
a  "  mace  " — a  company  organized  to  sell  out  at  black- 
mail prices  to  a  "  trust  " ;  and,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  some 
fellows  in  the  deal  did  come  pretty  near  blackmail  in  their 
efforts  to  make  the  People's  Company  buy  them  out.  More- 


52        STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

over,  the  two  companies  are  working  amicably  together 
now  under  a  financial  settlement  that  made  fortunes  for 
the  political  promoters.  But  I  must  not  get  ahead  of  my 
story.  In  1895  the  gas  deal  had  been  passed  through  the 
"  Democratic "  Chicago  council  and  was  ready  for  the 
Republican  State  Legislature. 

The  other  big  plan  was  Yerkes's  own.  Many  Chicago 
traction  franchises  were  expiring,  and  the  companies 
wanted  to  have  them  extended.  The  corrupt  municipal  sys- 
tem being  in  good  order,  the  companies  could  have  had 
from  the  city  council  anything  bribery  could  buy,  but  the 
council  was  unable  under  the  law  to  grant  an  extension  of 
franchises  for  more  than  twenty  years,  and  that  was  not 
enough  for  Yerkes.  Some  of  his  bonds  ran  longer  than 
that,  and  besides,  he  had  learned  his  financial  politics  in 
Pennsylvania,  where  they  give  franchises  for  999  years  and 
"  in  perpetuity."  Yerkes  wanted  a  franchise  for  at  least 
50  years. 

And  he  tried  to  get  it.  Where?  From  the  Illinois  State 
Legislature.  Yerkes  was  a  Big  Business  man,  and,  like  the 
gas  men,  he  understood  the  whole  machinery  of  govern- 
ment as  it  is.  He  did  not  try  first  for  home  rule  in  Chicago ; 
his  plans  took  him  out  into  the  State.  He  was  not  de- 
pendent upon  the  boodlers  of  Chicago.  Yerkes  knew  that 
corruption  was  a  State  as  well  as  a  municipal  system  in 
Pennsylvania,  and  when,  in  1895,  he  went  to  Springfield, 
the  capital  of  Illinois,  he  went  confident  that  he  would  find 
the  system  there.  And  it  was  there. 

It  had  been  there  for  at  least  twenty  years  and  closely 
resembled  that  of  Missouri.  The  railroads  and  other  great 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          53 

corporations  of  the  State  had  built  it  up,  and  it  was  theirs. 
They  hadn't  much  use  for  it  in  Yerkes's  day;  they  had 
long  before  got  about  all  they  required.  They  were  vulner- 
able to  taxation,  but  they  controlled  the  State  Board  of 
Equalization  (of  taxes).  About  the  only  other  use  they 
had  for  the  system  was  to  prevent  adverse  legislation,  and 
since,  as  the  railroad  men  say,  Illinois  is  "  fair "  and 
harbors  no  anti-railroad  sentiment,  they  were,  and  they 
are,  in  very  little  danger.  Nevertheless,  with  a  few  notable 
exceptions,  the  roads  have  always  kept  in  touch  with 
politics  all  along  their  lines,  and  maintained  the  system 
which  still  is  the  actual  government  of  Illinois.  The  head 
of  it  is,  not  the  railroad  lobby,  as  in  Missouri,  but  the  bi- 
partisan group  of  Senators,  called  the  "  Senate  combine," 
which  is  an  old  institution  now  reduced  to  refined  black- 
mail and  the  orderly  protection,  for  lump  fees,  of  special 
interests.  The  House,  more  unwieldly  and  changeable,  has 
to  be  moved  by  individual  bribes  of  various  amounts,  and 
there  is  often  scandal  and  quarreling  over  the  division  of 
the  spoils ;  but  the  "  regular  business  "  in  the  House  is 
done  by  committees  which  the  Speaker  appoints.  To  com- 
plete the  legislative  system,  the  Governor  should  be  either 
a  figurehead  or  the  boss. 

There  are  railroad  officials  and  corporation  managers 
in  Illinois  of  sufficient  moral  development  to  denounce  cor- 
ruption and  oppose  it,  and  they  think  well  of  themselves, 
because  they  never  boodle.  But  the  corrupt  system  which 
their  roads  established  remains  standing  ready  for  the 
service  of  all  who  seek  to  plunder  the  people.  And  when 
Yerkes  arrived,  it  was  at  his  service.  The  system  put 


64       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

through  his  50  years'  act  for  him.  There  was  much 
talk  of  money  paid;  when,  after  the  session,  Speaker 
Meyer  died,  a  large  sum  in  new  thousand-dollar  bills  was 
found  in  his  safe  deposit  box.  But  Governor  Altgeld,  a 
Democrat,  and  neither  a  figurehead  nor  the  boss  of  the 
system,  vetoed  the  bill.  The  old  system  was  not  in  good 
working  order. 

Yerkes,  a  great  man  in  his  class,  set  about  making  it 
go.  In  a  quiet,  "  business-like  "  way,  he  "  favored  "  John 
R.  Tanner  for  Governor  on  the  Republican  ticket  for  the 
election  of  1896.  Tanner  was  chairman  of  the  Republican 
Central  Committee.  As  we  noted  in  Missouri,  the  chairman 
of  a  State  committee  is  a  powerful  factor  in  a  corrupt 
State  system.  Tanner  came  as  near  being  a  State  boss  as 
any  man  in  Illinois  politics,  and  he  was  "  safe."  He  was 
nominated,  and  in  that  presidential  year  "  good  old  Re- 
publican "  Illinois  elected  him  with  a  "  solid  Repub- 
lican "  Legislature.  Thus  was  the  Republican  State  system 
repaired. 

All  clear  before  him,  Yerkes  found  trouble  brewing  in 
his  rear.  The  Democratic  city  system  was  getting  out  of 
order.  The  Chicago  reformers  were  making  progress. 
They  were  cutting  down  the  corrupt  majority  of  the 
council  and  organizing  the  public  opinion  which  the  great 
Chicago  newspapers  had  developed  against  franchise  steal- 
ing. Better  men  were  chosen  aldermen,  and  the  League 
and  the  newspapers  watched  them  and  made  the  public 
watch  and  understand.  By  the  spring  of  1897  traction 
and  Yerkes  had  become  an  issue  in  the  city,  and  Carter  H. 
Harrison  was  elected  mayor  on  it.  Yerkes  was  not  afraid 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          55 

of  Harrison.  "  Bobble "  Burke,  the  Democratic  boss, 
had  nominated  the  young  man,  and,  though  Harrison 
talked  inimically,  Burke  would  probably  control  him; 
and,  anyhow,  Yerkes  used  to  say,  "  every  man  has  his 
price." 

To  make  sure  of  his  plans,  however,  Yerkes  determined 
to  make  the  perfected  State  system  do  the  whole  job  for 
him.  Instead  of  having  it  grant  the  city  council  power  to 
extend  traction  franchises,  he  would  have  the  State  Legis  - 
lature  pass  bills  granting  the  extension  outright.  And  a 
set  of  measures,  called  the  Humphrey  Bills,  which  gave  the 
companies  fifty  years  more  of  life,  were  introduced  in  the 
Senate.  This  was  an  outrage,  but  it  rendered  a  great  serv- 
ice to  Chicago.  The  Humphrey  Bills  began  for  the  city 
one  of  the  greatest  lessons  a  city  can  learn — that  the  State 
is  a  part  of  the  municipal  government  and  that  municipal 
reform  must  include  State  reform.  The  mayoralty  cam- 
paign was  going  on  when  these  bills  appeared,  and  the 
candidates,  their  orators,  and  the  newspapers  lashed  them- 
selves and  the  voters  into  a  white  heat  over  them.  These 
bills  violated  the  principle  of  "  Home  Rule,"  and  mass- 
meetings  denounced  them  in  burning  resolutions  which 
spoke  of  "  financial  anarchists,"  "  bribe-givers  and  bribe- 
takers," and  ordered  posted  on  billboards  as  political  trait- 
ors all  Cook  County  Senators  who  voted  for  the  Humphrey 
Bills.  The  city  recognized  the  real  enemies  of  the  city. 
John  Maynard  Harlan,  a  candidate  for  mayor,  and  the 
city's  most  effective  orator,  called  a  roll  of  directors  and 
stockholders  of  the  Chicago  City  Railway  Company ;  these 
were  the  most  self-respecting  men  in  Chicago — Erskine  M. 


56       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

Phelps,  George  H.  Wheeler,  Samuel  W.  Allerton,  Marshall 
Field — but  their  company  was  interested  with  Yerkes ;  their 
counsel  was  with  him  at  Springfield ;  and  the  town  believed 
that  their  company's  money  was  being  paid  out  with  his 
In  bribes.  This  is  the  way  Mr.  Harlan  called  the  roll : 

And  now  we  have  got  to  talk  plain  language.  We  have 
got  to  hold  the  right  people  responsible.  We  have  got  to 
name  the  directors  of  these  companies ;  call  them  up.  Erskine 
M.  Phelps,  I  put  you  on  the  stand;  take  your  seat;  take  your 
oath  before  the  people  of  Chicago;  place  your  hand  upon  the 
Bible  of  the  people;  take  your  oath,  and  let  me  question  you, 
a  director  of  the  city  railway.  Erskine  M.  Phelps,  do  you 
know  that  your  general  counsel,  do  you  know  that  the  presi- 
dent of  your  company  is  down  at  Springfield — or  if  not  there 
in  person,  by  his  attorney  and  representative — for  the  pur- 
pose of  taking  part  in  a  grand  larceny  of  the  people  of 
Chicago?  There  for  the  purpose  of  burglarizing  the  City  of 
Chicago?  If  you  don't  know  that  we  tell  it  to  you  now. 
Your  agent,  your  president,  your  general  counsel,  formerly 
an  honored  member  of  the  bar,  that  has  done  great  service 
to  this  community,  your  general  counsel  is  there  engaged  in 
this  vile  conspiracy.  Now  you  know  it,  you  know  it  well, 
Erskine  M.  Phelps,  and  you — should  stop  it. 

Marshall  Field,  merchant  prince,  the  founder  of  a  great 
museum,  a  museum  that  shall  be  the  home  of  art,  literature, 
and  science;  Marshall  Field,  whose  voice  is  heard,  when  he 
chooses  to  make  it  heard,  in  the  councils  of  the  nation;  Mar- 
shall Fieldj  to  whom  there  has  been  no  such  word  as  failure 
in  all  his  private  undertakings;  Marshall  Field,  stockholder, 
influential  citizen;  Marshall  Field,  bring  your  influence  to 
bear  as  a  stockholder  and  stop  this  robbery. 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          57 

Thus  Mr.  Harlan  went  through  the  list.  It  hurt,  and 
it  helped,  too,  for  it  aroused  public  opinion  all  over  the 
State,  and  State  opinion  was  needed,  for  when  the  re- 
formers and  Mayor  Harrison,  elected,  went  down  to 
Springfield  to  protest,  they  found  the  State  system 
at  work  for  Yerkes,  and  it  was  at  work  for  the  gas 
companies  also.  It  was  one  of  the  worst  sessions  in  the 
history  of  the  State.  Everybody — captains  of  industry 
and  bosses,  bootblacks,  hack-drivers,  and  chambermaids — 
talked  graft ;  all  men  seemed  to  have  money,  and  the  bars 
and  poker  games  were  awash  with  it.  It  was  a  system  in 
joyous  operation,  and  anybody — the  reformers,  Chicago, 
the  whole  State — could  see  just  what  it  was  and  whose  it 
was  and  who  were  directing  it. 

Yerkes  sat  in  a  chair  at  the  head  of  the  stairs  in  the 
rotunda  of  the  capitol;  he  represented  the  American  busi- 
ness man.  In  the  executive  chamber  was  Governor  Tanner ; 
he  represented  the  State  machine.  William  Lorimer  occu- 
pied a  chair  in  the  Senate  chamber;  he  represented  the 
Republican  party  organization  of  Cook  County.  In  the 
lobby  moved  "  Doc  "  Jamieson  (Republican)  and  Roger 
Sullivan  (Democrat).  The  Democrats  of  Cook  County 
turn  over  to  the  Republicans  the  legislators  they  elect  just 
as  the  Republicans  of  Chicago  deliver  Republican  alder- 
men to  the  Democrats.  But  Roger  Sullivan  and  his  fol- 
lowers represented  the  Hopkins-Sullivan-Gahan  Democrats 
at  Springfield,  and  the  two  groups  of  "  leaders  "  labored 
together.  One  day  when  Mayor  Harrison,  there  to  speak 
for  his  city,  came  up  the  stairs,  Yerkes  laughed  at  him, 
and  well  he  might ;  for  with  both  party  leaders,  the  Gov- 


58       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

ernor,  and  the  State  delivering  over  the  city  to  him,  what 
could  the  Mayor  of  the  city  do?  It  was  absurd.  The 
Mayor  protested  and  the  citizens  met  in  mass,  but  their 
State  government  did  not  represent  them;  it  represented 
"  Business  " ;  special,  not  common,  interests.  And  the  gas 
and  the  traction  bills  were  advanced. 

There  was  a  hitch  over  the  gas  bills.  They  went  to 
committee  with  the  understanding  that  everything  was 
"  arranged,"  and  gas  stock  rose.  The  bills  did  not  come 
out  and  the  stock  dropped.  Then  "  all  was  settled  "  and 
the  stock  revived.  Again  the  bill  hung,  and  all  was  unset- 
tled, especially  the  stock.  This  happened  time  and  time 
again,  till  the  impression  was  spread  abroad  that  the 
People's  and  the  Ogden  were  fighting.  Then  the  bills  came 
out  and  were  passed.  It  developed  afterward  that  while 
petty  legislators  may  have  received  cash  bribes  for  gas 
legislation,  the  "  Senate  combine "  and  the  bosses  were 
taking  their  pay  out  of  the  stock  market,  and  the  succes- 
sion of  favorable  reports  and  apparent  failures  were  only 
for  stock- jobbing  purposes.  After  the  session  Lorimer, 
Jamieson,  and  others  had  plenty  of  money,  and  people 
were  asking  them  "  where  they  got  it."  The  answer  in  the 
public  mind  was  that  they  "  got  it  "  for  putting  the  gas 
bills  through  with  the  traction  deal,  and  they  were  silent 
for  two  years.  Then  they  suddenly  explained.  Their 
belated  explanation  differed  somewhat  from  that  just 
given,  but  it  admits  that  they  received  gas  stock  and  is 
full  of  incidental  interest. 

In  1899  these  Republican  bosses  were  accused  of  a  wish 
to  make  John  W.  Gates  a  United  States  Senator.  When 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          59 

such  politicians  choose  such  a  "  business  man  "  for  such 
high  office,  it  is  a  safe  working  hypothesis  to  assume  that 
the  man  himself  or  the  business  he  represents  has  been  at 
least  a  steady  contributor  to  campaign  funds.  The  Chi- 
cago newspapers  had  to  account  for  the  sudden  rise  of 
this  great  financial  "  sport  "  to  such  "  bad  eminence,"  and 
they  recalled  that  in  the  rush  of  business  men  to  the 
scandalous  legislature  of  1897  Gates  was  there  with  two 
bills  for  his  Illinois  Steel  and  Wire  Company,  and  that 
Lorimer  and  Jamieson  helped  him  to  pass  them.  Now 
Lorimer  and  Jamieson  were  for  Gates  for  United  States 
Senator.  Why?  Report  had  it  that  Gates  had  purchased 
for  them  at  82,  two  thousand  shares  apiece  of  gas  stock; 
and  that  when  the  gas  bills  passed  Lorimer  sold  his  at  93, 
while  Jamieson  held  on  till  he  got  103  and  cleared  $40,000. 
The  bosses  liked  this  story,  for  the  Gates  bills  were  "  honest 
bills."  Here  is  Jamieson's  statement  as  printed  in  the  Chi- 
cago Evening  Journal: 

As  far  as  the  stock  story  goes,  it  is  correct.  It  is  also  true  that 
the  start  of  it  was  the  four  thousand  shares  of  gas  stock  which 
Mr.  Gates  margined  for  us.  It  was  in  return  for  our  looking 
out  for  Bills  90  and  108  [Gates's],  which  were  liable  to  be 
overlooked  in  the  rush  of  the  closing  day  of  the  legislature. 
They  were  perfectly  honest  bills,  there  was  no  opposition  to 
them,  and  our  influence  simply  went  to  the  extent  of  having 
them  called  up  for  discussion  and  passage.  There  were  no 
views  or  votes  against  them,  and  naturally  they  passed.  Mr. 
Gates  in  return  gave  us  the  gas  stock  and  we  carried  it  through 
the  big  rise.  With  the  money  made  we  have  made  other  deals. 
We  have  speculated  freely  and  I  may  say  with  some  success, 


60       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

and  I  do  not  care  who  knows  it.  There  is  nothing  about  the 
entire  transaction  to  conceal,  and  perhaps  it  will  answer 
the  question  some  of  our  enemies  have  asked,  "  Where  did 
you  get  it?  "  Since  it  is  out,  I  have  no  desire  to  deny  or 
conceal  it. 

As  for  Mr.  Gates's  candidacy,  that  is  another  matter.  I  do 
not  know  what  his  ambitions  are.  But  I  will  say  this,  that  he 
can  have  anything  I  can  give  him  or  help  him  to  get.  He  has 
been  a  heavy  contributor  to  the  Republican  campaign  funds 
for  many  years,  and  has  taken  a  big  interest  in  State  politics. 
He  is  a  big  man  in  this  State,  brainy,  influential,  and  a  leading 
manufacturer.  He  would  make  a  good  Senator  and  he  can  have 
my  support  whenever  he  wants  it.  I  am  making  no  announce- 
ment of  his  candidacy,  neither  do  I  deny  it.  He  could  have  a 
very  large  portion  of  Cook  County  back  of  him. 

Lorimer,  Congressman  and  boss,  said :  "  I  have  no  desire 
to  conceal  anything.  What  Dr.  Jamieson  has  said  I 
indorse,  and  I  am  inclined  to  think  Mr.  Gates  would  get  a 
good  chance  of  winning  if  he  entered  the  race  as  a  candi- 
date for  Senator." 

Gates  did  not  go  to  the  Senate,  so  we  may  pass  this 
side-light  on  the  way  "  the  system "  produces  United 
States  Senators.  Pass  also,  but  note  well,  the  exposure  this 
"  explanation  "  makes  of  the  character  of  the  Cook  County 
leaders  of  the  Republican  party  of  Illinois.  The  fact  of 
immediate  interest  is  that  the  gas  bills  went  through  the 
legislature  and  were  signed  by  the  Governor,  and  that 
Chicago  did  not  care.  The  city  had  been  torn  up  again 
and  again  for  the  mains  of  companies  that  promised  com- 
petition to  the  trust,  and  always  the  competitors  sold  out 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          61 

to  the  trust.  They  were  at  least  relieved  of  that  condition, 
for  the  purpose  of  the  bills  was  to  create  a  monopoly. 

Chicago  concentrated  all  its  attention  upon  the  Hum- 
phrey Bills,  and  that  attention  began  to  take  effect.  These 
bills  had  come  down  from  the  "  Senate  combine  "  to  the 
House,  and  were  in  a  fair  way  of  being  passed  there,  when 
the  agitation  in  Chicago  and  the  fight  of  the  Chicago 
newspapers,  which  circulate  throughout  the  State,  aroused 
the  country  people,  who  began  to  speak  to  their  represent- 
atives in  the  lower  house.  There  was  no  direct  appeal  from 
Chicago  to  the  country.  I  have  never  yet  come  upon  an 
instance  where  a  State,  having  been  made  intelligent  con- 
cerning any  sound,  essential  demand  of  a  city,  has  failed 
to  respond,  but  few  cities  have  learned  to  confide  in  the 
"  farmers,"  as  they  call  them,  and  Chicago  had  not.  Chi- 
cago's case  was  presented  only  indirectly  to  Illinois,  but 
the  State  acted.  Illinois  killed  the  Humphrey  Bills  in  the 
House. 

That  did  not  beat  the  bosses.  Chicago's  chief  stated 
objection  to  the  Humphrey  Bills  was  that  they  violated 
the  home-rule  principle,  so  Yerkes  substituted  another, 
called  the  Allen  Bill,  which  did  not  grant  outright  the 
fifty-year  extension  of  franchises,  but  permitted  the  Chi- 
cago council  to  do  so.  From  the  point  of  view  of  the 
country  this  was  fair,  since  it  left  the  problem  to  Chicago, 
but  as  Chicago  saw  it,  the  move  was  an  appeal  from  the 
State  system  back  to  the  city  system,  and,  with  the  impli- 
cation of  threatened  bribery  of  the  council,  the  Allen  Bill 
threw  the  city  into  a  fresh  tempest  of  passion.  The  swing 
of  public  opinion  was  so  swift  that  even  the  Allen  Bill 


62       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

seemed  in  danger.  The  'country  members  had  "  lost  their 
nerve,"  and  the  bosses  saw  that  the  measure  must  be  ad- 
vanced under  the  gavel.  Speaker  Curtis  was  afraid  to  use 
force,  and  he  suddenly  developed  a  "  gum  boil,"  and  was 
sent  off  in  a  special  car  to  Mammoth  Cave.  The  Speaker 
pro  tern,  hammered  the  bill  through  to  the  third  reading, 
then  it  was  passed  by  both  houses  and  Governor  Tanner 
signed  it. 

The  next  step  for  Yerkes  now  was  to  get  a  Chicago 
council  that  would  pass  an  ordinance  to  carry  the  Allen 
Law  into  effect.  The  outlook  was  discouraging,  for  the 
town  was  ringing  with  wrath,  but  Yerkes  and  his  friends 
in  both  parties  went  quietly  to  work.  The  honest  news- 
papers and  the  League  also  went  to  work,  however,  and 
loudly,  and  their  appeal  was  to  the  people  to  send  up 
aldermen  that  Yerkes  couldn't  buy.  How  the  people  re- 
sponded, I  have  told  in  an  article  on  Chicago  in  "  The 
Shame  of  the  Cities."  But  there  is  a  part  of  the  story  I  did 
not  tell,  Mayor  Harrison's  part.  The  League  had  tried  to 
get  enough  honest  aldermen  to  organize  the  council,  but 
failed.  Johnnie  Powers  beat  them  and  the  combine  con- 
trolled the  committees  and  had  a  majority  for  Yerkes's 
Lyman  ordinance,  which  was  to  put  the  Allen  Law  into 
effect.  But  the  Mayor  presides  in  the  Chicago  council, 
and  he  has  a  veto  which  it  takes  a  two-thirds  vote  to 
override.  Carter  H.  Harrison  was  the  key  to  the  situation. 

The  time  was  come  for  Yerkes  to  "  see  "  Mayor  Har- 
rison. The  promoter  had  called  often  on  the  young  man 
in  the  city  hall,  but  always  the  Mayor's  secretary  or 
someone  else  was  by.  Yerkes  asked  the  Mayor  to  dismiss 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          63 

the  witness  or  go  into  a  separate  room,  but  the  Mayor 
never  would.  Now,  with  the  council  organized  and  ready, 
Yerkes  had  to  "  see  "  Harrison,  and  alone,  and  he  saw  him 
alone,  as  Yerkes  thought;  but  there  was  a  witness,  so  I 
know  that  Yerkes  said  that  he  could  not  understand  why 
the  young  Mayor  was  against  traction.  "  Many  of  my 
friends  in  the  deal  are  your  friends,"  he  said.  "  Some  of 
your  friends  are  in  it.  Why  are  you  against  it?  "  And  the 
Mayor  answered  that.  Then  Yerkes  put  to  the  Mayor  the 
great  question : 

"  Mr.  Mayor,  what  is  it  that  you  want  ?  " 

When  the  Mayor  answered  that,  Mr.  Yerkes  saw  the 
beginning  of  the  end  of  his  Chicago  career.  He  did  not 
give  up  at  once.  The  fight  proceeded  in  the  council,  and 
it  was  a  fight  indeed.  Reform  aldermen  were  bought  over 
and  Harrison  Democrats  weakened,  but  the  reformers  put 
spies  on  their  men  and  Harrison  put  the  whip  on  his.  And 
the  System  had  its  troubles,  too.  Aldermen  in  the  boodle 
combine  were  asked  by  their  children  if  what  the  other 
"  scholars  said  at  school  was  true,  that  their  papa  was  a 
boodler  "  ?  Willing  boodlers  coming  home  at  night  found 
a  mass  committee  from  the  ward  .waiting  to  ask  them  if 
they  were  going  to  "  sell  us  out  to  Yerkes  "?  One  alder- 
man, finding  his  house  closed  against  him  one  night, 
knocked  for  admittance,  and,  when  his  wife  answered,  she 
asked  through  the  closed  door  if  he  was  "  for  Chicago  or 
for  Yerkes  "?  Some  of  these  men  declared  they  would 
have  to  "  go  back  on  the  party,"  and  many  more  had  to 
"  turn  honest,"  for  a  mob,  organized  by  Harrison 
Democrats,  stood  ready  with  ropes  at  the  crisis  to  hang 


64       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

all  "  traitors."  The  council  did  not  make  the  Allen  Law 
effective;  it  did  not  grant  a  fifty-year  extension  of  fran- 
chise for  "  nothing  but  boodle."  Mayor  Harrison  defeated 
the  treason  of  his  own  party. 

Chicago  is  thinking  seriously  now  of  throwing  aside 
Mr.  Harrison  for  a  mayor  who  will  give  the  city  adminis- 
trative reform,  and  anyone  who  will  talk  with  this  remark- 
able man  must  feel  that  a  change  is  necessary.  He  has 
made  many  improvements.  He  has  abolished  some  intoler- 
able abuses.  With  all  that  he  has  accomplished,  however, 
graft  and  inefficiency  persist,  and  I  could  not  find  in  his 
own  mind  any  hope  of  such  thorough-going  administra- 
tive reform  as  that  which  Chicago  now  seems  bent  upon. 
No,  that  will  not  come  from  Mr.  Harrison;  he  does  not, 
in  his  heart,  care  enough  about  good  government  to  give 
it.  But  Harrison  does  care  about  self-government;  he 
really  has  a  sense  of  government  for  a  people.  I  don't 
know  how  he  came  by  it,  whether  it  was  born  in  him  or 
was  acquired  from  his  political  experience,  nor  does  that 
matter.  Harrison  is  not  merely  a  Democrat ;  he  is  a  demo- 
crat with  a  small  d.  For  the  democracy  he  withstood 
Yerkes  and  all  Yerkes's  money.  And  he  withstood  also 
Richard  Croker.  The  Tammany  boss  called  on  the  ambi- 
tious young  Mayor  just  before  a  National  Democratic 
Convention.  He  spoke  for  himself,  William  C.  Whitney, 
and  other  National  Democrats,  and  his  subject  was  the 
future  of  the  party  and  Mr.  Harrison.  As  the  Mayor 
once  put  it  with  a  laugh:  "  Croker  took  me  up  on  the 
mountain  and  showed  me  the  cities  of  the  earth."  And 
while  Harrison  contemplated  the  view,  Croker  said  that 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          65 

he  had  a  friend,  Mr.  Yerkes,  and  that  anything  Mayor 
Harrison  could  do  for  that  friend  would  be  appreciated 
by  Mr.  Croker  and  by  Croker's  and  Whitney's  Wall 
Street  friends,  whom  Yerkes  had  loaded  up  with  Chicago 
traction  stock.  The  Chicago  Democratic  Mayor  put  aside 
the  temptation  of  the  National  Democrats,  and  he  cut 
loose  from  some  of  the  same  sort  of  "  Democrats  "  at 
home.  He  did  not  recognize  John  R.  Walsh.  He  fought 
Johnnie  Powers  and  his  Democratic  combine.  He  finally 
dropped  "  Bobbie  "  Burke,  his  own  Democratic  boss.  And 
when  leaders  of  the  Hopkins-Sullivan-Gahan  wing  of  the 
Cook  County  Democracy  came  to  him  to  sign  an  ordinance 
to  permit  them  to  sell  out  their  Ogden  Gas  Company  and 
complete  the  deal  with  the  People's  Gas  and  Coke  Com- 
pany, he  refused  them  also.  The  two  companies  have 
finally  come  to  an  understanding  with  John  R.  Walsh, 
Roger  Sullivan,  etc.,  on  the  Ogden  board;  and  C.  K.  G. 
Billings,  chairman  of  the  People's  board,  on  the  board  of 
Walsh's  bank.  But  they  could  not  combine  legally,  and 
it  was  Harrison  who  foiled  them.  Harrison  has  lost  all 
these  leaders  of  the  "  business  end  "  of  his  own  party, 
and  he  had  beaten  them  year  by  year  till  this  spring  (1904) 
William  R.  Hearst  came  along  with  his  anti-trust  boom 
for  the  Presidency  and  combined  with  those  fellows  who 
have  sold  out  the  Democracy  to  trusts.  With  such  help  the 
Hopkins-Sullivan-Burke-Powers  Democracy  rose  and  de- 
feated the  Harrison  Democracy.  Let  Chicago  put  Har- 
rison aside,  and  go  on  its  way,  as  it  must,  but  the  city 
should  acknowledge  that  this  man  has  served  well  the  City 
of  Chicago  and  American  democracy. 


66       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

But  this  is  a  Republican  article.  Yerkes,  beaten  in 
Chicago,  was  looking  back  to  the  State  again.  And  Chi- 
cago, victorious  in  Chicago,  was  also  looking  back  to  the 
State.  Yerkes  asked  only  time  and  no  legislation.  Chicago 
demanded  the  repeal  of  the  Allen  Law  in  the  session  of 
1899.  Yerkes's  hope  was  in  the  State  system ;  Chicago's 
was  in  the  people  of  Illinois,  and  this  time  the  appeal  was 
direct;  not  sympathetic,  but  emotional  and  intimate,  and 
the  country  papers  took  it  up.  Chicago  asked  the  State 
to  keep  out  of  the  Legislature  every  man  who  had  voted 
for  the  Allen  Law,  and — I'd  like  to  have  every  city  in 
every  State  grasp  the  significance  of  the  result  of  this 
cry  of  Chicago  to  Illinois — of  sixteen  retiring  Senators 
who  voted  for  the  act,  but  two  were  reflected ;  and  of  the 
eighty-two  Representatives  who  voted  for  it,  but  four- 
teen were  reflected. 

By  this  verdict  the  State  system  was  thrown  out  of 
order  once  more,  and  it  had  to  be  rebuilt.  The  "  Senate 
combine  "  was  reorganized,  but  it  was  timid,  and  Law- 
rence Y.  Sherman,  one  of  the  fourteen  Representatives 
reflected  over  their  Allen  vote,  was  elected  Speaker  of 
the  House.  But  Sherman,  a  lean,  long,  fighting  country- 
man, "  deceived,"  he  said,  "  by  Lorimer,"  was  swearing 
angry  at  the  Cook  County  ring,  and  when  he  organized  the 
House  he  knew  what  he  was  about.  It  was  his  House,  not 
Yerkes's,  not  Lorimer's,  and  it  was  going  to  repeal  the 
Allen  Law  "  first  off."  No  Lorimer-Jamieson  leader  dared 
approach  Sherman,  so  Yerkes  himself  sent  for  him  and 
wanted  the  Speaker  to  "  gavel "  the  repeal  down. 

"Will  the  Allen  Law  be  repealed?  "  he  asked  Sherman. 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          67 

"  I  don't  know,"  said  Sherman,  "  but  there  will  be  a 
roll-call." 

"  If  there's  a  roll-call  the  bill  will  be  repealed,"  said 
the  captain  of  industry. 

"  Do  you  think  I  would  stand  up  there  and  suspend  a 
roll-call  on  a  measure  so  important  as  that?  "  Sherman 
asked. 

Then  Yerkes  became  angry.  "  You  don't  dare  let  the 
Allen  Law  be  repealed.  No  man  can  turn  tail  on  our 
interests  and  live  politically." 

There  was  the  voice  of  the  System,  the  sentiment  of  Big 
Business.  Sherman  dared,  and  Sherman  has  had  to  fight 
for  his  political  life;  but  he  lives  politically  by  fighting. 
And  he  lives  in  Illinois,  too.  Yerkes  lived  in  New  York  and 
London.  There  was  a  roll-call  on  the  Allen  repeal,  and  it 
was  carried,  with  only  one  or  two  votes  against  it.  The 
Senate  passed  it  on  up  to  Governor  Tanner,  and  the 
Governor  signed  it.  That  ended  traction  legislation  in 
the  interest  of  the  franchise  boodlers ;  and  it  ended  the 
use  of  the  State  government  as  a  system  for  turning  out 
laws  for  special  interests.  But  it  did  not  destroy  the  Sys- 
tem itself. 

Mayor  Harrison  and  the  Chicago  reformers,  strength- 
ened in  the  city  council,  took  the  aggressive  now.  They 
could  refuse  to  extend  franchises  to  the  street  railways, 
but  they  would  have  to  let  the  companies  run  over  the 
time,  since  the  city  had  no  power  to  take  the  property. 
They  did  not  all  want  "  municipal  ownership,"  but  the 
city  had  to  obtain  from  the  State  Legislature  power  to 
receive  back  the  property  in  order  to  carry  on  negotia- 


68       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

tions  to  compel  fair  terms.  They  might  not  want  to  exer- 
cise that  power,  but  they  had  to  have  it.  They  asked  the 
Legislature  of  1899  for  it.  The  legislators,  afraid  of  the 
whole  subject,  would  not  touch  any  phase  of  it,  and  noth- 
ing was  done.  Negotiations  with  the  companies  pro- 
ceeded, and  the  disposition  of  the  city  council,  Mayor,  and 
reformers  was  to  be  fair,  but  the  traction  people  would 
not  give  up  their  faith  in  corrupt  force.  They  would  not 
settle.  In  1901  the  city  returned  to  the  Springfield  Legis- 
lature with  a  comprehensive  bill  for  a  general  street  rail- 
way law,  but  the  State  system  was  being  reorganized,  and 
it  was  strong  enough  to  strangle  the  city's  bill  in 
committee. 

That  brought  home  to  some  of  the  Chicago  reformers 
with  full  force  the  truth  that  the  State  Legislature,  being 
a  part  of  their  municipal  government,  was  as  much  in 
need  of  systematic  study  and  improvement  as  the  council. 
That  was  as  far  as  they  saw.  They  did  not  yet  realize 
that  the  legislative  system  is  but  a  part  of  the  whole  State 
system,  that  this  system  is  rooted  in  the  corruption  of 
the  lesser  cities,  the  towns,  and  country  districts,  and  that 
general  State  reform  is  as  necessary  as  municipal  reform 
in  Chicago.  But  Chicago  reformers  make  their  observa- 
tions, not  in  a  study,  but  on  the  firing  line,  and  they  see 
only  what  is  right  before  them.  They  shoot  at  what  they 
see,  however,  and  in  1901  they  organized  a  Legislative 
Voters'  League  for  Cook  County,  with  George  E.  Cole 
as  president  and  Hoyt  King  as  secretary.  This  League 
applies  to  the  nomination  and  election  of  Senators  and 
Representatives  from  Chicago  the  same  methods  that 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          69 

proved  so  effective  for  aldermanic  reform,  viz.:  it  keeps 
records  of  legislators'  votes  and  conduct,  publishes  them, 
and  advises  upon  their  nomination  and  election.  Reform 
in  Chicago  always  organizes,  informs  and  helps  direct 
the  public  opinion  aroused,  and  its  leaders  wield  that  tre- 
mendous power  with  tact,  political  skill,  and  common 
sense,  and  with  effect — as  they  proved  so  dramatically  at 
the  next  session  of  the  Legislature,  the  session  of  1903. 

Chicago  was  bound  to  have  its  enabling  legislation. 
Yerkes  was  gone,  but  his  representatives  and  successors 
and  the  Lorimer-Jamieson  Republican  ring  were  bound  to 
have  no  legislation.  There  was  a  new  Governor,  Richard 
Yates,  but  Lorimer  had  led  a  convention  stampede  to 
nominate  him,  and  he  was  "  with  the  party."  The  Legis- 
lature was  Republican,  as  usual.  Lawrence  Y.  Sherman 
and  a  group  of  independent  Republicans,  called  the 
"  Fighting  Forty,"  were  preparing  to  represent  Chicago, 
but  the  Chicago  bosses  organized  the  House  with  John 
H.  Miller  for  Speaker.  There  were  rumors  that  the  news- 
papers and  the  Legislative  Voters'  League  had  warned 
and  won  over  the  "  Senate  combine,"  but  it  was  the  same 
old  bipartisan  combine,  and  the  bosses  trusted  it.  The 
situation  seemed  to  be  in  Lorimer's  hands  when  the  rep- 
resentatives of  the  Municipal  and  Legislative  Voters' 
Leagues,  of  the  city  council,  and  of  all  the  candidates 
that  were  running  for  Mayor  in  the  pending  Chicago 
campaign,  looked  it  over  at  Springfield.  Mr.  Edwin  Bur- 
ritt  Smith,  who  was  there  as  special  counsel  to  the  city 
council's  Traction  Committee,  sums  it  up  thus  in  his 
article  in  the  Atlantic  Monthly  for  January,  1904: 


70       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

It  was  understood  that,  as  a  condition  of  his  election,  the 
Speaker  was  required  to  promise  to  carry  out  Hinman's  [the 
editor  of  Yerkes's  "  Republican  "  Inter  Ocean]  orders  on  all 
street  railway  measures,  and  to  use  the  gavel  when  necessary 
to  defeat  objectionable  legislation.  Mr.  Gus  Nohe — Lori- 
mer's  member  from  his  own  legislative  district — when  asked 
whether  there  was  to  be  any  traction  legislation,  replied:  "  I 
don't  know.  I  do  whatever  the  old  man  [Lorimer]  tells  me; 
and  he  tells  me  to  do  about  traction  as  Hinman  says."  Hinman 
himself  announced  that  there  would  be  no  traction  legislation 
at  that  session. 

Congressman  Lorimer,  the  boss,  did  not  want  to  appear 
at  Springfield,  because  he  was  running  a  "  good  business 
man  "  for  Mayor  on  the  Republican  ticket  in  Chicago, 
and  his  candidate  was  for  traction  legislation.  But  one 
of  the  city's  bills,  drawn  by  Walter  L.  Fisher,  of  the 
Municipal  Voters'  League,  was  going  through  the  Senate. 
This  was  the  Mueller  Bill,  and  the  "  combine,"  under  the 
whip  of  the  League,  the  Chicago  newspapers,  and  public 
opinion  generally,  sent  the  measure  down  to  the  House. 
Lorimer  had  to  go  to  Springfield,  and  he  took  personal 
charge  in  the  House.  It  was  indeed  an  emergency.  The 
Mueller  Bill  was  safely  buried  in  the  Municipal  Commit- 
tee, but  clearly,  with  the  lobby  full  of  Chicago  reformers 
and  committees  from  citizens'  associations,  to  say  nothing 
of  his  own  "  business  man  for  Mayor  " — all  demanding 
legislation — some  bill  had  to  pass.  Lorimer  gave  one  day 
the  word  for  action,  and  both  parties  in  the  House  held 
caucuses  that  evening.  The  result  was  bad—"  for  the 
organization."  Lorimer  sent  for  the  legislators  one  by 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          71 

one,  and  late  at  night  called  a  conference  in  his  own  room 
in  the  Leland  Hotel,  of  certain  ring-leaders,  the  Chicago 
Aldermanic  Committee,  Graeme  Stuart,  his  business  can- 
didate for  Mayor;  Frank  O.  Lowden  (a  candidate  this 
year  for  Governor),  Edwin  Burritt  Smith,  and  others. 
Mr.  Smith  says  Lorimer — a  Congressman,  mind  you,  not 
a  State  legislator — opened  the  discussion  by  asking, 
"  What  do  you  want  ?  "  Lorimer  declared  that  the  Mueller 
Bill  was  dead,  and  he  offered  as  a  substitute  a  bill  to  be 
called  the  Lindley  Bill.  That  the  official  representatives 
of  Chicago  rejected;  "it  bore  unmistakable  signs,"  Mr. 
Smith  says,  "  of  tender  regard  for  traction  interests." 
Lorimer  accepted  some  amendments,  proposed  others  him- 
self, and  when  these  failed  to  satisfy  the  friends  of  the 
city,  the  boss,  a  leader  of  the  Republican  party  in  Illinois, 
said  the  Lindley  Bill  was  all  Chicago  would  get.  "  You 
must  accept  it  with  these  amendments,  pull  down  all 
opposition  in  the  House  and  from  the  Chicago  press, 
and  actively  support  the  bill.  It  is  the  Lindley  Bill  or 
nothing." 

The  Chicago  press  had  been  telling  the  city  and  State 
all  about  the  situation,  and,  with  the  Allen  Bill  episode  in 
mind,  the  organization  legislators  were  anxious  and  weak. 
Chicago  decided  to  reject  the  Lindley  substitute  and  to 
fight  its  own  boss  on  the  floor  of  the  House.  With  Sher- 
man's "  Fighting  Forty  "  and  the  Democrats  who  were 
willing  to  help  they  had  the  votes,  and  all  that  they  needed 
was  a  roll-call.  But  the  Speaker,  asked  if  he  would  allow 
one,  refused  to  say.  For  two  days  there  were  skirmishes, 
and  the  voting  showed  that  the  "  organization  "  was  in  a 


72       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

precarious  condition,  but  at  last  the  Speaker  rose,  pale, 
but  with  gavel  in  hand,  to  force  the  amendments  to  the 
Lindley  Bill.  Back  of  him  were  some  women ;  beside  and 
before  him  stood  a  score  of  strong  men  ready  to  defend 
him.  The  bill  was  called  up,  and  Mr.  Lindley  offered 
Lorimer's  Amendment  Number  One.  The  law  required  a 
roll-call  upon  a  demand  of  five  members.  Ninety-six  rose 
and  shouted  "  Roll-call !  "  The  Speaker  would  not  hear ; 
he  put  the  amendment  and,  amid  confusion  and  outcries, 
swung  down  his  gavel  and  declared  the  amendment  car- 
ried. Amid  great  excitement  Amendment  Number  Two 
was  offered ;  members  cried  "  Roll-call !  Roll-call !  "  But 
again  the  gavel  fell  and  the  second  amendment  was  "  car- 
ried," and  so,  with  the  storm  waxing,  Numbers  Three, 
Four,  Five,  and  Six  were  hammered  through.  But  at  the 
sixth  the  House  broke,  and  there  was  a  rush  for  the  Speak- 
er's chair.  If  it  hadn't  been  for  the  women  back  of  him, 
missiles  would  have  been  showered  upon  him;  as  it  was, 
the  wave  of  angry  members  rose  up  to  the  chair,  and  the 
Speaker  fled  through  a  back  door. 

Balked,  the  House  paused  a  moment;  then  Representa- 
tive Sherman  whispered  something  to  a  friendly  Repre- 
sentative, who  called  the  House  to  order.  The  House  re- 
organized with  Representative  Charles  A.  Allen  as  tem- 
porary Speaker,  a  roll-call  showed  a  quorum  present,  and 
the  Lindley  Bill  was  moved  for  reconsideration.  One  by 
one,  on  roll-call,  the  amendments,  Numbers  Six,  Five, 
Four,  etc.,  were  rejected  in  reverse  order,  the  bill  was 
laid  on  the  table,  and  the  Mueller  Bill  was  substituted  for 
it.  Then  a  scathing  resolution  of  censure  was  passed  upon 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          73 

the  fugitive  Speaker  and  the  House  adjourned.  He  was 
in  conference  with  Governor  Yates,  Lorimer,  and  Hinman, 
and  when  he  returned  to  his  seat  that  afternoon  he  took 
his  censure  and  excused  himself  by  making  charges  of 
attempts  to  bribe  him,  which  were  investigated  and  found 
to  be  unfounded.  After  the  investigation  the  Mueller 
traction  bill  was  finally  passed  and  Governor  Yates  signed 
it.  He  wrote  a  memorandum  giving  reasons  why  the  bill 
should  not  become  a  law,  but  he  made  it  a  law. 

Now  for  the  Missouri-Illinois  parallel.  When  Mr.  Folk 
realized  that  the  political  corruption  of  St.  Louis  was  but 
a  part  of  the  financial-political  State  system,  which  has 
supplanted  a  representative  democracy  with  an  oligarchy 
of  criminals,  he  started  what  he  called  a  counter-revolu- 
tion. He  saw,  moreover,  that  his  party,  controlled  by 
boodlers,  was  the  organization  of  this  treason.  The  Dem- 
ocratic party  represented  not  democracy,  but  the  enemies 
of  democracy.  What  did  he  do?  Because  he  was  a  Demo- 
crat, he  appealed  first  to  the  Democrats  of  Missouri,  be- 
cause they  were  Democrats,  to  clear  out  first  of  all  the 
Democratic  boodlers  because  they  were  Democrats.  That 
was  putting  party  loyalty  to  a  pretty  severe  test.  What 
happened?  Such  a  splendid  exhibition  of  genuine  patriot- 
ism as  this  country  seldom  has  a  chance  to  display.  The 
Democrats  of  Missouri  rose  up  and  they  smashed  that 
rotten  old  machine  all  to  pieces ;  they  took  back  the  con- 
trol of  their  party  and  they  are  making  it  fit  for  any 
American  citizen  to  support.  And  the  good  citizens  of 
Missouri  will  be  asked  to  support  it,  for,  incidentally,  the 
Democrats  insured  the  nomination  of  Mr.  Folk  for  gov- 


74.       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

ernor.  He  will  make  his  campaign  on  the  same  issue, 
"Boodle,"  and  since. the  Republican  party  also  boodled, 
he  will  ask  all  men  of  all  parties  to  let  him  organize  an 
administration  that  will  represent,  not  bribery,  but  all 
the  men  of  Missouri. 

The  issue  was  not  made  so  clear,  nor  so  personal,  nor 
so  exciting  in  Illinois,  but  Illinois  seems  to  be  more  intelli- 
gent politically  than  Missouri,  less  partisan,  and  boodle 
was  the  issue  there  this  summer.  Chicago  realized  after 
its  eight  years  of  war  that  the  existing  political  system 
misrepresented  the  people  in  both  city  and  State  govern- 
ment, and  that  the  Republican  party,  the  dominant  one, 
was  the  party  to  try  first  to  clean  up.  In  it  the  worst 
traitors  to  the  people  were  the  Lorimer-Jamieson  group. 
The  Chicago  reformers  asked  the  Republicans  of  Cook 
County  and  of  Illinois  to  take  away  from  them  the  con- 
trol of  the  party  and  restore  it  to  Republicans  who  would 
represent  the  common  interest  of  all  the  people  of  the 
State.  The  Chicago  Daily  News,  The  Tribune,  and  The 
Record-Herald,  the  trusted  newspapers  that  express  pub- 
lic opinion  in  Chicago,  and  (therefore,  I  think)  wield  that 
"  power  of  the  press  "  which  so  many  journals  elsewhere 
are  bemoaning  the  loss  of,  voiced  a  demand  to  have  Charles 
S.  Deneen  nominated  for  Governor. 

Deneen  is  a  Cook  County  Republican  leader,  a  politi- 
cian, who  associated  for  years  with  Lorimer  and  Jamieson. 
Chicago  is  not  afraid  of  politicians.  All  the  city's  best 
reform  efforts  have  been  directed,  not  to  put  reformers  in 
office,  but  rather  to  force  the  politicians  to  represent  the 
people,  and  the  "  newspaper  trust "  and  the  Voters' 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          75 

Leagues  are  developing  a  class  of  politicians,  not  always 
sincere,  who  recognize  that  public  opinion  is  a  constant 
force  in  politics.  Deneen  is  an  honest  man;  I  never  heard 
his  integrity  questioned.  He  has  been  State's  Attorney 
since  1896,  and  his  record  is  one  of  orderly,  efficient,  fear- 
less, and  aggressively  honest  service.  He  did  not  go  forth, 
like  Folk,  seeking  out  corruption  in  all  places,  but  he 
performed  the  duties  that  came  to  him  with  tireless,  mas- 
terful energy,  and  there  is  a  line  of  cells  in  one  State 
prison  so  full  of  business  men  whom  Deneen  convicted 
that  it  is  called  Bankers'  Row.  Deneen  is  a  remarkable 
man.  But,  for  the  sake  of  simplification,  let  us  say  only 
that  he  is  a  politician  who  believes  that  it  is  good  politics 
to  serve  the  public. 

That  is  all  Chicago  requires,  and  that  made  the  issue 
in  the  Republican  party  of  Illinois  in  the  summer  of  1904 ; 
the  fight  was  over  the  nomination  for  Governor,  but  the 
question  raised  was:  What  shall  the  Republican  party 
represent?  Deneen  said :  "  The  public  interest."  He  wanted 
to  be  Governor,  but  he  understood  that  the  men  who  sup- 
ported him  were  seeking  to  beat  the  Lorimer-Jamieson  ring, 
which  believes  that  the  Republican  party  exists  to  serve 
special  interests.  Lorimer  and  Jamieson  understood  this, 
too.  There  were  other  candidates.  Governor  Yates,  a  shal- 
low, pompous  person,  sought  a  second  term,  but  he  thought 
Yates  was  the  issue.  Then  there  was  an  eloquent  young 
lawyer,  Frank  O.  Lowden,  son-in-law  of  George  M.  Pull- 
man, who  wants  to  be  something  prominent  in  politics, 
United  States  Senator  or  Governor.  He  is  a  "  fine  fellow  " 
and  he  has  more  personal  friends  among  the  reformers  and 


76       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

best  citizens  of  Chicago  than  Deneen,  but  when  he  appeared 
as  a  candidate  for  the  nomination  the  old  ring  backed  him, 
not  all  his  friends.  Mr.  Lowden  is  a  "  safe  man  " ;  he  is 
the  type  that  "  fools  "  most  good  citizens.  Having  a 
"  laudable  ambition,"  he  seeks  an  office,  not  an  issue,  and 
he  cannot  understand  why  he  should  not  "  welcome  the 
support  of  his  party  " ;  and  when  he  achieves  office  he 
cannot  understand  why  he  should  not  support  his  party. 
The  Lowdens  are  the  kind  of  men  political  bosses  put  up 
when  the  ring  is  on  the  verge  of  a  defeat,  and,  being  "  good 
men,"  they  cloud  issues  and  save  the  rings.  They  do  not 
mislead  Chicago.  The  city  saw  through  Lowden  to  the 
ring  behind  him,  and  the  Republicans  of  Cook  County  sent 
to  the  convention  a  large  majority  of  delegates  instructed 
for  Deneen.  Many  of  the  delegates,  and  some  of  the  ward 
leaders,  were  reluctant  and  hankered  for  their  old  boss, 
but  Public  Opinion  held  them  to  their  instructions. 

If  Deneen,  or,  better  still,  if  Chicago  had  made  as  care- 
ful a  canvass  of  the  country  as  Folk  did  of  Missouri,  I 
believe  Illinois  would  have  responded  like  Missouri.  As 
it  was,  the  Republicans  of  Illinois  did  not  decide.  The 
country  districts  followed  their  leaders  and  the  nomina- 
tion was  left  to  the  convention.  There  were  six  or  seven 
candidates.  Yates,  with  his  patronage-built  State  organ- 
ization ;  Lowden,  with  the  old  bosses,  the  special  interests, 
and  his  money ;  and  Deneen,  with  Cook  County,  the  Chi- 
cago newspapers,  and  the  best  public  opinion — these  three 
led  in  strength,  and  a  deadlock  ensued  which,  for  dura- 
tion, was  unprecedented  in  the  State. 

The  efforts  to  break  it  developed  the  apex  of  the  State 


CHICAGO'S    APPEAL    TO    ILLINOIS          77 

System.  I  said  a  while  ago  that  the  United  States  Govern- 
ment was  a  part  of  the  State  and  municipal  systems  of 
Illinois  and  Chicago.  Speaker  Cannon,  of  the  National 
House  of  Representatives,  was  chairman  of  the  convention, 
and  United  States  Senators  Cullum  and  Hopkins  were  pres- 
ent also.  These  men,  and  the  whole  "  Federal  Bunch,"  as 
the  Federal  officeholders  are  called,  "  worked  "  for  Lowden. 
Not  that  they  cared  especially  for  him,  though  one  of  them 
remarked  that  it  was  well  to  have  "  a  governor  with  a  bar- 
rel." But  their  influence  was  for  "  harmony,"  the  "  good  of 
the  party,"  not  of  the  State,  nor  even  of  the  Republican 
citizens  of  the  State — but  of  the  old  party  leaders  and  "  the 
thing  as  it  was."  Well,  they  did  help  to  break  the  deadlock. 
Chicago  and  Illinois  resent  Federal  interference.  When  this 
spring  the  Municipal  League  made  its  successful  fight  to 
beat  "  Doc  "  Jamieson  in  that  boss's  own  ward,  Congress- 
man Lorimer  and  Senators  Cullom  and  Hopkins  persuaded 
President  Roosevelt  to  appoint  Jamieson  Naval  Officer  of 
the  Port.  Upon  their  advice,  confirmed,  as  he  said,  by 
such  "  respectable  business  men  as  John  M.  Smyth,"  etc., 
the  President  gave  the  discredited  boss  the  office  and  the 
moral  and  political  support  that  went  with  it.  William 
Kent  says  that  that  helped  to  defeat  Jamieson  in  his 
ward.  So,  at  the  convention,  the  Chicago  newspapers, 
talking  always  of  the  old  ring,  were  able  to  point  out  that 
the  National  Government  was  back  of  Lowden  and  his 
backers.  This  crystallized  public  opinion.  The  conven- 
tion took  a  recess  for  ten  days.  When  it  reconvened, 
though  the  deadlock  held  for  two  days  more,  the  current 
of  sentiment  was  toward  Deneen ;  and  Yates,  to  get  even 


78       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

with  the  ring  that  had  used,  then  dropped  him,  directed 
his  delegates  to  vote  for  Deneen. 

There  was  a  "  deal "  between  Yates  and  Deneen.  But 
the  terms  were  honorable,  and  besides,  "  political  deals  " 
are,  like  politicians,  not  bad  in  themselves.  They  are  bad 
when  they  trade  the  public  interest  off  for  special  and 
personal  interests,  and  the  deal  which  carried  out  the 
wishes  of  the  best  public  opinion  in  Illinois  and  made 
Charles  S.  Deneen  the  Republican  candidate  for  Governor 
(and  Lawrence  Y.  Sherman  the  candidate  for  Lieu  tenant- 
Governor),  did  for  the  Republican  party  of  Illinois  what 
the  Democratic  voters  of  Missouri  did  for  the  Democratic 
party,  when  they  sent  up  delegates  instructed  for  Folk — 
restored  the  control  to  the  people  of  the  party.  That  deal 
completed  the  political  ruin  of  the  Lorimer-Jamieson  ring, 
and,  I  verily  believe,  begins  a  movement  to  carry  on  out 
into  the  State  the  reform  which  was  begun  eight  years  ago 
in  Chicago — a  reform  which  aims  to  make  the  government, 
municipal  and  State,  represent,  not  bribers,  not  corrupt 
politicians,  not  corrupting  business  men,  but  the  common 
interests  of  the  State — the  citizens  and  friends,  not  the 
enemies,  of  the  Republic.2 

2  Deneen  was  elected  governor  of  Illinois  by  an  overwhelming 
majority. 


WISCONSIN:   REPRESENTATIVE  GOVERNMENT 
RESTORED 

THE    STORY    OF    LA  FOLLETTE'S    WAR    ON    THE    RAIL- 
ROADS   THAT    RULED    HIS    STATE 
(October,  1904) 

THE  story  of  the  State  of  Wisconsin  is  the  story  of  Gov- 
ernor LaFollette.  He  is  the  head  of  the  State.  Not  many 
Governors  are  that.  In  all  the  time  I  spent  studying  the 
government  of  Missouri  I  never  once  had  to  see  or  name 
the  Governor  of  Missouri,  and  I  doubt  if  many  of  my 
readers  know  who  he  was.  They  need  not.  He  was  only  the 
head  of  the  paper  government  described  in  the  Constitu- 
tion, and  most  Governors  are  simply  "  safe  men  "  set  up 
as  figureheads  by  the  System,  which  is  the  actual  govern- 
ment that  is  growing  up  in  the  United  States  in  place  of 
the  "  government  of  the  people,  by  the  people,  and  for 
the  people,  which  shall  not  perish  from  the  earth."  The 
System,  as  we  have  found  it,  is  a  reorganization  of  the 
political  and  financial  powers  of  the  State  by  which,  for 
boodle  of  one  sort  or  another,  the  leading  politicians  of 
both  parties  conduct  the  government  in  the  interest  of 
those  leading  businesses  which  seek  special  privileges  and 
pay  for  them  with  bribes  and  the  "  moral "  support  of 
graft.  And  a  "  safe  man  "  is  a  man  who  takes  his  ease, 
honors,  and  orders,  lets  the  boss  reign,  and  makes  no  trou- 
ble for  the  System. 

79 


80       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

There  is  trouble  in  Wisconsin.  Bounded  on  the  east  by 
Lake  Michigan,  on  the  north  by  Lake  Superior,  on  the 
west  by  the  Mississippi  River,  Wisconsin  is  a  convenient, 
rich,  and  beautiful  State.  New  England  lumbermen 
stripped  fortunes  of  forest  off  it,  and,  uncovering  a  fat 
soil  watered  by  a  thousand  lakes  and  streams,  settlers 
poured  in  from  Northwestern  Europe  and  made  this  new 
Northwest  ripen  into  dairy  farms  and  counties  of  golden 
wheat.  From  the  beginning  Wisconsin  has  paid,  nor  is 
there  now  any  material  depression  or  financial  distress 
in  the  State.  Yet  there  is  trouble  in  Wisconsin.  What  is 
the  matter?  I  asked  a  few  hundred  people  out  there  to 
explain  it,  and  though  some  of  them  smiled  and  others 
frowned,  all  gave  substantially  one  answer :  "  LaFollette- 
ism."  They  blame  one  man. 

Robert  Marion  LaFollette  was  born  on  a  farm  in  Dane 
County,  Wisconsin,  June  14,  1855.  His  father  was  a 
Kentucky-bred  French  Huguenot;  his  mother  was  Scotch- 
Irish.  When  the  boy  was  eight  months  old  the  father  died, 
leaving  the  mother  and  four  children,  and,  at  the  age  of 
fourteen,  "  Little  Bob,"  as  his  followers  still  call  him, 
became  the  head  of  the  family.  He  worked  the  farm  till 
he  was  nineteen  years  old,  then  sold  it  and  moved  the 
family  to  Madison,  the  county-seat  and  capital  of  the 
State.  If,  with  this  humble  start,  LaFollette  had  gone 
into  business,  his  talents  might  have  made  him  a  captain 
of  industry ;  and  then,  no  matter  how  he  won  it,  his  suc- 
cess would  have  made  him  an  inspiration  for  youth.  But 
he  made  a  mistake.  He  entered  the  State  University  with 
the  class  of  '79.  Even  so,  he  might  have  got  over  his  col- 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  81 

lege  education,  but  his  father's  French  blood  (perhaps) 
stirred  to  sentiment  and  the  boy  thrilled  for  glory.  He 
had  a  bent  for  oratory.  In  those  days  debates  ranked  in 
the  Western  colleges  where  football  does  now,  and  "  Bob  " 
LaFollette  won,  in  his  senior  year,  all  the  oratorical  con- 
tests, home,  State,  and  interstate.  His  interstate  oration 
was  on  lago,  and  his  round  actor's  head  was  turned  to  the 
stage,  till  John  McCullough  advised  him  that  his  short 
stature  was  against  that  career.  Also,  he  says,  his  debts 
chained  him  to  the  earth.  He  had  to  go  to  work,  and  he 
went  to  work  in  a  law  office.  In  five  months  he  was  admit- 
ted to  the  bar,  and  in  February,  1880,  he  opened  an  office 
and  began  to  practice.  A  year  or  so  later  the  young 
lawyer  was  running  for  an  office. 

"  They  "  say  in  Wisconsin  that  LaFollette  is  ambi- 
tious; that  he  cannot  be  happy  in  private  life;  that,  an 
actor  born,  he  has  to  be  on  a  stage.  I  should  say  that  a 
man  who  can  move  men,  as  LaFollette  can,  would  seek  a 
career  where  he  could  enjoy  the  visible  effect  of  his  elo- 
quence. But  suppose  "  they  "  are  right  and  the  man  is 
vain ; — I  don't  care.  Do  you  ?  I  have  noticed  that  a  pub- 
lic official  who  steals,  or,  like  Lieutenant-Governor  Lee, 
of  Missouri,  betrays  his  constituents,  may  propose  to  be 
Governor,  without  being  accused  of  ambition.  "  They  " 
seem  to  think  a  boodler's  aspirations  are  natural.  He  may 
have  a  hundred  notorious  vices ;  they  do  not  matter.  But 
a  "  reformer,"  a  man  who  wants  to  serve  his  people,  he 
must  be  a  white-robed,  spotless  angel,  or  "  they "  will 
whisper  that  he  is — what?  A  thief?'  Oh,  no;  that  is  noth- 
ing ;  but  that  he  is  ambitious.  This  is  the  System  at  work. 


82       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

It  was  the  System  in  Missouri  that,  after  spending  in 
vain  thousands  of  dollars  to  "  get  something  on  Folk," 
passed  about  the  damning  rumor  that  he  was  ambitious. 
And  so  in  Wisconsin,  "  they  "  will  take  you  into  a  back 
room  and  warn  you  that  LaFollette  is  ambitious.  I  asked 
if  he  was  dishonest.  Oh  dear,  no.  Not  that.  Not  a  man 
in  the  State,  not  the  bitterest  foe  of  his  that  I  saw,  ques- 
tioned LaFollette's  personal  integrity.  So  I  answered  that 
we  wanted  men  of  ambition ;  that  if  we  could  get  men  to 
serve  us  in  public  life,  not  for  graft,  not  for  money,  but 
for  ambition's  sake,  we  should  make  a  great  step  forward. 

Mr.  LaFollette  has  ambition.  He  confessed  as  much  to 
me,  but  he  is  after  a  job,  not  an  office;  Governor  LaFol- 
lette's ambition  is  higher  and  harder  to  achieve  than  any 
office  in  the  land. 

The  first  office  he  sought  was  that  of  District  Attorney 
of  Dane  County,  and,  although  his  enemies  declare  that 
the  man  is  a  radical  and  was  from  the  start  a  radical,  I 
gathered  from  the  same  source  that  his  only  idea  at  this 
time  was  to  "  pose  "  before  juries  "  and  win  cases."  Mr. 
LaFollette  married  in  this  year  (a  classmate),  and  he  says 
he  thought  of  the  small  but  regular  salary  of  the  District 
Attorney.  However  this  may  be,  he  won  the  office  and  he 
won  his  cases,  so  he  earned  his  salary.  District  Attorney 
LaFollette  made  an  excellent  record.  That  is  freely  admit- 
ted, but  my  attention  was  called  to  the  manner  of  his 
entrance  into  politics,  as  proof  of  another  charge  that  is 
made  against  him  in  Wisconsin.  "  They  "  say  LaFollette 
is  a  politician. 

"  They "   say   in   Missouri   that  Folk   is   a   politician. 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  83 

"  They "  say  in  Illinois  that  Deneen  is  a  politician. 
"  They  "  say  in  the  United  States  that  President  Roose- 
velt is  a  politician.  "  They  "  are  right.  These  men  are 
politicians.  But  what  of  it?  We  have  blamed  our  poli- 
ticians so  long  for  the  corruption  of  our  politics  that  they 
themselves  seem  to  have  been  convinced  that  a  politician 
is  necessarily  and  inherently  bad.  He  isn't,  of  course. 
Only  a  bad  politician  is  bad,  and  we  have  been  discovering 
in  our  studies  of  graft  that  a  bad  business  man  is  worse. 
To  succeed  in  reform,  a  man  has  to  understand  politics 
and  play  the  game,  or  the  bad  business  man  will  catch  him, 
and  then — what  will  he  be?  He  will  be  an  "  impracticable 
reformer,"  and  that,  we  all  know,  is  awful. 

"  Bob "  LaFollette  is  a  politician.  Irish,  as  well  as 
French,  he  was  born  a  master  of  the  game,  and  he  did 
indeed  prove  his  genius  in  that  first  campaign.  Single- 
handed  he  beat  the  System.  Not  that  he  realized  then 
that  there  was  such  a  thing.  All  the  young  candidate 
knew  when  he  began  was  that  E.  W.  Keyes,  the  post- 
master at  Madison,  was  the  Republican  State  boss,  and, 
of  course,  absolute  master  of  Dane  County,  where  he 
lived.  LaFollette  was  a  Republican,  but  he  had  no  claim 
of  machine  service  to  the  office  he  wanted,  and  he  felt  that 
Boss  Keyes  and  Philip  L.  Spooner,  the  local  leader,  would 
be  against  him,  so  he  went  to  work  quietly.  He  made  an 
issue;  LaFollette  always  has  an  issue;  but  his  first  one 
wasn't  very  radical.  It  had  been  the  practice  of  District 
Attorneys  to  have  assistants  at  the  county's  expense,  and 
LaFollette  promised,  if  elected,  to  do  all  his  own  work. 
With  this  promise  he  and  his  friends  canvassed  the  county, 


84.       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

house  by  house,  farm  by  farm,  and,  partly  because  they 
were  busy  by  day,  partly  because  they  had  to  proceed 
secretly,  much  of  this  politics  was  done  at  night.  The 
scandal  of  such  "  underhand  methods  "  is  an  offense  to 
this  day  to  the  men  who  were  beaten  by  them.  Mr. 
"  Phil "  'Spooner  (the  Senator's  brother)  speaks  with 
contempt  of  LaFollette's  "  night  riders."  He  says  the 
LaFollette  workers  went  about  on  horseback  after  dark 
and  that  he  used  to  hear  them  gallop  up  to  their  leader's 
house  late  at  night.  Of  course  he  knows  now  that  they 
were  coming  to  report  and  plot,  but  he  didn't  know  it 
then.  And  Boss  Keyes,  who  is  still  postmaster  at  Madison, 
told  me  he  had  no  inkling  of  the  conspiracy  till  the  con- 
vention turned  up  with  the  delegates  nearly  all  instructed 
for  LaFollette  for  District  Attorney.  Then  it  was  too 
late  to  do  anything. 

Boss  Keyes  thought  this  showed  another  defect  in  the 
character  of  LaFollette.  "  They  "  say  in  Wisconsin  that 
the  Governor  is  "  selfish,  dictatorial,  and  will  not  consult." 
"  They "  said  that  about  Folk  in  Missouri,  when  he 
refused  to  appoint  assistants  dictated  by  Boss  Butler. 
Wall  Street  said  it  about  Roosevelt  when  he  refused  to 
counsel  with  Morgan  upon  the  advisability  of  bringing 
the  Northern  Securities  case,  but  the  West  liked  that  in 
Roosevelt.  The  West  said  it  about  Parker  when  he  sent 
his  gold  telegram  to  the  Democratic  National  Convention, 
but  the  East  liked  that  in  Parker.  There  must  be  some- 
thing back  of  this  charge,  and  a  boss  should  be  able  to 
explain  it.  Boss  Keyes  cleared  it  up  for  me.  He  said  that 
at  the  time  "  Bob  "  was  running  for  District  Attorney, 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  85 

"  a  few  of  us  here  were — well,  we  were  managing  the 
party  and  we  were  usually  consulted  about — about  things 
generally.  But  LaFollette,  he  went  ahead  on  his  own 
hook,  and  never  said  a  word  to — well,  to  me  or  any  of  us." 
So  it's  not  a  matter  of  dictation,  but  of  who  dictates,  and 
what.  In  the  case  of  LaFollette,  his  dictatorial  selfishness 
consisted  in  this,  that  he  "  saw  "  the  people  of  the  county 
and  the  delegates,  not  "  us,"  not  the  System.  No  wonder 
he  was  elected.  What  is  more,  he  was  reflected;  he  kept 
his  promises,  and,  the  second  time  he  ran,  LaFollette  was 
the  only  Republican  elected  on  the  county  ticket. 

During  the  two  terms  of  District  Attorney  LaFollette, 
important  changes  were  occurring  in  the  Wisconsin  State 
system  beyond  his  ken.  Boss  Keyes  was  deposed  and 
Philetus  Sawyer  became  the  head  of  the  State.  This  does 
not  mean  that  Sawyer  was  elected  Governor;  we  have 
nothing  to  do  with  Governors  yet.  Sawyer  was  a  United 
States  Senator.  While  Keyes  was  boss,  the  head  of  the 
State  was  in  the  post-office  at  Madison,  and  it  represented, 
not  the  people,  but  the  big  business  interests  of  the  State, 
principally  lumber  and  the  railways,  which  worked  well 
together  and  with  Keyes.  There  were  several  scandals 
during  this  "  good  fellow's  "  long  reign,  but  big  busi- 
ness had  no  complaint  to  make  against  him.  The  big 
graft  in  this  Northwestern  State,  however,  was  lumber, 
and  the  typical  way  of  getting  hold  of  it  wholesale,  was 
for  the  United  States  to  make  to  the  State  grants  which 
the  State  passed  on  to  railway  companies  to  help  "  de- 
velop the  resources  of  the  State."  Railroad  men  were  in 
lumber  companies,  just  as  lumbermen  were  in  the  rail- 


86       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

way  companies,  so  railway  companies  sold  cheap  to  the 
lumber  companies,  which  cleared  the  land — for  the  set- 
tlers. This  was  business,  and  while  it  was  necessary  to 
"  take  care  "  of  the  Legislature,  the  original  source  of 
business  was  the  Congress,  and  that  was  the  place  for  the 
head  of  the  System.  Keyes  had  wished  to  go  to  the  Senate, 
but  Sawyer  thought  he  might  as  well  go  himself.  He  had 
gone,  and  now,  when  Keyes  was  willing  to  take  the  second 
seat,  the  business  men  decided  that,  since  it  was  all  a 
matter  of  business,  they  might  as  well  take  it  out  of 
politics.  Thus  Senator  Sawyer  became  boss,  and,  since  he 
was  a  lumberman,  it  was  no  more  than  fair  that  the  other 
seat  should  go  to  the  railroads.  So  the  big  business  men 
got  together  and  they  bought  the  junior  United  States 
Senatorship  for  the  Honorable  John  C.  Spooner. 

At  Marinette,  Wisconsin,  lives  to-day  a  rich  old  lumber- 
man, Isaac  Stephenson.  He  was  associated  for  years  with 
Senator  Sawyer  and  the  other  enemies  of  the  Republic  in 
Wisconsin,  and  he  left  them  because  they  balked  an  am- 
bition of  his.  Having  gone  over,  however,  he  began  to 
see  things  as  they  are,  and  not  many  men  to-day  are  more 
concerned  over  the  dangers  to  business  of  the  commercial 
corruption  of  government  than  this  veteran  who  con- 
fesses that  he  spent  a  quarter  of  a  million  in  politics. 

Once  he  and  Senator  Sawyer  were  comparing  notes 
on  the  cost  to  them  of  United  States  Senatorships. 

"  Isaac,"  said  Sawyer,  "  how  much  did  you  put  in  to 
get  the  Legislature  for  Spooner  that  time?  " 

"  It  cost  me  about  twenty-two  thousand,  Philetus.  How 
much  did  you  put  in  ?  " 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  87 

"  Why,"  said  Sawyer,  surprised,  "  it  cost  me  thirty 
thousand.  I  thought  it  cost  you  thirty." 

"  No,  it  cost  me  thirty  to  get  it  for  you  when  you  ran." 

Friends  of  mine,  who  are  friends  of  Senator  Spooner 
in  Washington,  besought  me,  when  they  heard  I  was 
going  to  Wisconsin,  to  "  remember  that  Spooner  is  a 
most  useful  man  in  the  Senate,"  and  I  know  and  shall  not 
forget  that.  Able,  deliberate,  resourceful,  wise,  I  believe 
Senator  Spooner  comes  about  as  near  as  any  man  we 
have  in  that  august  chamber  to-day  to  statesmanship, 
and  I  understand  he  loathes  many  of  the  practices  of 
politics.  But  the  question  to  ask  about  a  representative 
is,  what  does  he  represent? 

Senator  Spooner,  at  home,  represented  the  railroads 
of  his  State.  He  served  a  term  in  the  Wisconsin  assembly, 
and  he  served  the  railroads  there.  After  that  he  served 
them  as  a  lobbyist.  I  do  not  mean  that  he  went  to  Madi- 
son now  and  then  to  make  arguments  for  his  client.  Mr. 
Spooner  spent  the  session  there.  Nor  do  I  mean  to  say 
that  he  paid  bribes  to  legislators ;  there  are  honest  lobby- 
ists. But  I  do  say  that  Mr.  Spooner  peddled  passes,  and 
any  railroad  man  or  any  grafter  will  tell  you  that  this 
is  a  cheap  but  most  effective  form  of  legislative  cor- 
ruption. United  States  Senator  Spooner,  then,  is  a  pro- 
duct, a  flower,  perhaps,  but  none  the  less  he  is  a  growth 
out  of  the  System,  the  System  which  is  fighting  Governor 
LaFollette. 

The  System  was  fighting  LaFollette  'way  back  in  those 
days,  but  the  young  orator  did  not  know  it.  He  was  run- 
ning for  Congress.  So  far  as  I  can  make  out,  he  was 


88       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

seeking  only  more  glory  for  his  French  blood  and  a  wider 
field  to  shine  in,  but  he  went  after  his  French  satisfaction 
in  a  Scotch-Irish  fashion.  Boss  Keyes  told  me  about  it. 
Keyes  had  been  reduced  to  the  control  only  of  his  Con- 
gressional district,  and,  as  he  said,  "  We  had  it  arranged 
to  nominate  another  man.  The  place  did  not  belong  to 
Dane  County.  It  was  another  county's  turn,  but  Bob 
didn't  consult  us."  Bob  was  consulting  his  constituents 
again,  and  his  night  riders  were  out.  The  System  heard 
of  it  earlier  than  in  the  District  Attorney  campaign,  and 
Keyes  and  Phil  Spooner  and  the  other  leaders  were  angry. 
Keyes  did  want  to  rule  that  Congressional  district;  it  was 
all  he  had,  and  Phil  Spooner  (who  now  is  the  head  of  the 
street  railway  system  of  Madison)  sensed  the  danger  in 
this  self-reliant  young  candidate. 

"  What's  this  I  hear  about  you  being  a  candidate  for 
Congress?"  he  said  to  LaFollette  one  day.  "Don't  you 
know  nobody  can  go  to  Congress  without  our  approval? 
You're  a  fool." 

But  LaFollette's  men  were  working,  and  they  carried 
all  except  three  caucuses  (primaries  that  are  something 
like  town  meetings)  against  the  ring.  The  ring  bolted, 
but  the  people  elected  him;  the  people  sent  LaFollette 
to  Congress  at  the  same  time  they  elected  the  legislators 
that  sent  John  C.  Spooner  to  the  United  States  Senate. 

When  LaFollette  had  been  in  Washington  a  few  weeks, 
Senator  Sawyer  found  him  out  and  became  "  like  a 
father  "  to  him.  "  Our  boy  "  he  called  him,  for  LaFollette 
was  the  "  youngest  member."  The  genial  old  lumberman 
took  him  about  and  introduced  him  to  the  heads  of  de- 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  89 

partments  and  finally,  one  day,  asked  him  what  committee 
he  would  like  to  go  on.  LaFollette  said  he  would  prefer 
some  committee  where  his  practice  in  the  law  might  make 
him  useful,  and  Sawyer  thought  "  Public  Lands  "  would 
about  do.  He  would  "  fix  it."  Thus  the  System  was  com- 
ing after  him,  but  it  held  back;  there  must  have  been  a 
second  thought.  For  the  Speaker  put  LaFollette  not  on 
"  Public  Lands,"  but  on  "  Indian  Affairs." 

The  Governor  to-day  will  tell  you  with  a  relish  that  he 
was  so  green  then  that  he  began  to  "  read  up  on  Indians  " ; 
he  read  especially  Boston  literature  on  that  subject,  and 
he  thought  of  the  speeches  he  could  make  on  Indian 
wrongs  and  rights.  But  there  was  no  chance  for  an  orator. 
The  committee  worked  and  "  our  boy  "  read  bills.  Most 
of  these  bills  were  hard  reading  and  didn't  mean  much 
when  read.  But  by  and  by  one  came  along  that  was  "  so 
full  of  holes  that,"  as  the  Governor  says,  "  even  I  could 
see  through  it."  It  provided  for  a  sale  of  pine  on  the 
Menominee  reservation  in  Wisconsin.  Mr.  LaFollette  took 
it  to  the  (Cleveland's)  Commissioner  of  Indian  Affairs, 
and  this  official  said  he  thought  it  "  a  little  the  worst 
bill  of  the  kind  that  I  have  ever  seen.  Where  did  it  come 
from  ?  "  They  looked  and  they  saw  that  it  had  been  intro- 
duced by  the  member  from  Oshkosh  (Sawyer's  home  dis- 
trict). None  the  less,  Mr.  LaFollette  wanted  a  report, 
and  the  Commissioner  said  he  could  have  one  if  he  would 
sit  down  and  write  for  it.  The  report  so  riddled  the  bill 
that  it  lay  dead  in  the  committee.  One  day  the  Congress- 
man who  introduced  it  asked  about  it. 

"  Bob,  why  don't  you  report  my  bill  ?  "  he  said. 


90       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

"  Bill,"  said  Bob,  "  did  you  write  that  bill?  " 

"Why?" 

"  It's  a  steal." 

"  Let  it  die  then.  Don't  report  it.  I  introduced  it  be- 
cause Sawyer  asked  me  to.  He  introduced  it  in  the  Senate 
and  it  is  through  their  committee." 

Sawyer  never  mentioned  the  bill,  and  the  incident  was 
dropped  with  the  bill.  Some  time  after,  however,  a  similar 
incident  occurred,  and  this  time  Sawyer  did  mention  it. 
The  Indian  Affairs  Committee  was  having  read,  at  the 
rate  of  two  hours  a  day,  a  long  bill  to  open  the  big  Sioux 
Indian  reservation  in  Dakota,  by  selling  some  eleven  mil- 
lion acres  right  through  the  center.  It  was  said  to  be  a 
measure  most  important  to  South  Dakota,  and  no  one 
objected  to  anything  till  the  clerk  droned  out  a  provision 
to  ratify  an  agreement  between  the  Indians  and  certain 
railroads  about  a  right  of  way  and  some  most  liberal 
grants  of  land  for  terminal  town  sites.  LaFollette  in- 
terrupted, and  he  began  to  talk  about  United  States 
statutes  which  provided  not  so  generously,  yet  amply, 
for  land  grants  to  railways,  when  a  Congressman  from 
a  neighboring  State  leaned  over  and  said: 

"  Bob,  don't  you  see  that  those  are  your  home 
corporations  ?  " 

Bob  said  he  saw,  and  he  was  willing  to  grant  all  the 
land  needed  for  railway  purposes,  but  none  for  town  site 
schemes.  When  the  committee  rose,  and  LaFollette  re- 
turned to  his  seat  in  the  house,  a  page  told  him  Senator 
Sawyer  wanted  to  see  him.  He  went  out  and  the  Senator 
talked  to  him  for  an  hour  in  a  most  fatherly  way,  with 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  91 

not  a  word  concerning  the  Sioux  bill  till  they  were  about 
to  separate.  Then,  quite  by  the  way,  he  said: 

"  Oh,  say,  when  that  Sioux  Injun  bill  comes  up  there's 
a  little  provision  in  it  for  our  folks  which  I  wish  you  to 
look  after." 

LaFollette  said  the  bill  was  up  then,  that  they  had  just 
reached  the  "  little  provision  for  our  folks,"  and  that 
he  was  opposing  it. 

"  Why,  is  that  so  ? "  said  Sawyer.  "  Let's  sit  down 

and "  they  had  another  hour,  on  town  sites.  It  was 

no  use,  however.  LaFollette  "  wouldn't  consult."  Sawyer 
gave  up  reasoning  with  him,  but  he  didn't  give  up  "  the 
little  provision."  Political  force  was  applied,  but  not  by 
the  senior  Senator.  The  System  had  other  agents  for  such 
work. 

Henry  C.  Payne  arrived  on  the  scene.  Payne  was  chair- 
man of  the  Republican  State  Central  Committee  of  Wis- 
consin, and  we  have  seen  in  other  States  what  the  legis- 
lative functions  of  that  office  are.  Payne  reached  Wash- 
ington forty-eight  hours  after  LaFollette's  balk,  and  he 
went  at  him  hard.  All  sorts  of  influence  was  brought  to 
bear,  and  when  LaFollette  held  out,  Payne  became  so 
angry  that  he  expressed  himself — and  the  spirit  of  the 
System — in  public.  To  a  group  in  the  Ebbitt  House  he 
said: 

"  LaFollette  is  a  damned  fool.  If  he  thinks  he  can  buck 
a  railroad  with  five  thousand  miles  of  continuous  line, 
he'll  find  he's  mistaken.  We'll  take  care  of  him  when  the 
time  comes." 

The  State  machine  fought  the  Congressman  in  his  own 


92       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

district,  and  so  did  Keyes  and  the  "  old  regency "  at 
Madison,  but  LaFollette,  the  politician,  had  insisted  upon 
a  Congressman's  patronage,  all  of  it,  and  he  had  used 
it  to  strengthen  himself  at  home.  LaFollette  served  three 
terms  in  Congress,  and  when  he  was  defeated  in  1890,  for 
the  fourth,  he  went  down  with  the  whole  party  in  Wis- 
consin. This  complete  overthrow  of  the  Republicans  was 
due  to  two  causes,  the  McKinley  tariff  (which  LaFollette 
on  the  Ways  and  Means  Committee  helped  to  frame)  and 
a  piece  of  State  school  legislation  which  angered  the 
foreign  and  Catholic  voters.  We  need  not  go  into  this, 
and  the  Democratic  administration  which  resulted  bears 
only  indirectly  on  our  story. 

One  of  the  great  grafts  of  Wisconsin  (and  of  many 
another  State)  was  the  public  funds  in  the  keeping  of  the 
State  Treasurer.  The  Republicans,  for  years,  had  de- 
posited these  moneys  in  banks  that  stood  in  with  the  Sys- 
tem, and  the  treasurer  shared  with  these  institutions  the 
interest  and  profits.  He,  in  turn,  "  divided  up  "  with  the 
campaign  fund  and  the  party  leaders.  The  Democrats 
were  pledged  to  break  up  this  practice  and  sue  the  ex- 
treasurers.  Now  these  treasurers  were  not  all  "  good " 
for  the  money,  and  when  the  suits  were  brought,  as  they 
were  in  earnest,  the  treasurers'  bondsmen  were  the  real 
defendants.  Chief  among  these  was  Senator  Sawyer,  the 
boss  who  had  chosen  the  treasurers  and  backed  them 
and  the  practice  for  years.  Sawyer  was  alarmed.  It  was 
estimated  that  there  had  been  $30,000  a  year  in  the 
graft ;  the  Attorney-General  was  going  back  twenty  years, 
and  his  suits  were  for  the  recovery  of  all  the  back  inter- 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  93 

est.  Several  hundred  thousand  dollars  was  at  stake. 
And  the  judge  before  whom  the  cases  were  to  be  tried  was 
Robert  J.  Siebecker,  brother-in-law  and  former  law  part- 
ner of  Robert  M.  LaFollette. 

One  day  in  September,  1891,  LaFollette  received  from 
Sawyer  a  letter  asking  for  a  meeting  in  the  Plankington 
Hotel,  Milwaukee.  The  letter  had  been  folded  first  with 
the  letter  head  on,  then  this  was  cut  off  and  the  sheet  re- 
folded ;  and,  as  if  secrecy  was  important,  the  answer  sug- 
gested by  Sawyer  was  to  be  the  one  word  "  Yes  "  by  wire. 
LaFollette  wired  "  Yes,"  and  the  two  men  met.  There  are 
two  accounts  of  what  occurred.  LaFollette  said  Sawyer 
began  the  interview  with  the  remark  that  "  nobody  knows 
that  I'm  to  meet  you  to-day  " ;  he  spoke  of  the  treasury 
cases  and  pulled  out  and  held  before  the  young  lawyer  a 
thick  roll  of  bills.  Sawyer's  subsequent  explanation  was 
that  he  proposed  only  to  retain  LaFollette,  who,  however, 
insists  that  Sawyer  offered  him  a  cash  bribe  for  his  in- 
fluence with  Judge  Siebecker. 

Since  Sawyer  is  dead  now,  we  would  better  not  try  to 
decide  between  the  two  men  on  this  particular  case,  but 
there  is  no  doubt  of  one  general  truth :  that  Philetus  Saw- 
yer was  the  typical  captain  of  industry  in  politics ;  he 
debauched  the  politics  of  his  State  with  money.  Old  Boss 
Keyes  was  bad  enough,  but  his  methods  were  political — 
patronage,  deals,  etc.,  and  he  made  the  government  repre- 
sent special  interests.  But  when  the  millionaire  lumberman 
took  charge,  he  came  with  money;  with  money  he  beat 
Keyes ;  and  money,  his  and  his  friends',  was  the  power  in 
the  politics  of  his  regime. 


94       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

His  known  methods  caused  no  great  scandal  so  long 
as  they  were  confined  to  conventions  and  the  Legislature, 
but  the  courts  of  Wisconsin  had  the  confidence  of  the 
State,  and  the  approach  of  money  to  them  made  people 
angry.  And  the  story  was  out.  LaFollette,  after  consulta- 
tion with  his  friends,  told  Judge  Siebecker  what  had  hap- 
pened, and  the  Judge  declined  to  hear  the  case.  His  with- 
drawal aroused  curiosity  and  rather  sensational  conjec- 
tures. Sawyer  denied  one  of  these,  and  his  account  seeming 
to  call  for  a  statement  from  LaFollette,  the  young  law- 
yer told  his  story.  Sawyer  denied  it  and  everybody  took 
sides.  The  cases  were  tried,  the  State  won,  but  the  Re- 
publican Legislature,  pledged  though  it  was  to  recover  in 
full,  compromised.  So  the  System  saved  its  boss. 

But  the  System  had  raised  up  an  enemy  worthy  of  all 
its  power.  LaFollette  was  against  it.  "  They "  say  in 
Wisconsin  that  he  is  against  the  railroads,  that  he 
"  hates  "  corporate  wealth.  It  is  true  the  bitterest  fights 
he  has  led  have  been  for  so-called  anti-railroad  laws,  but 
"  they  "  forget  that  his  original  quarrel  was  with  Sawyer, 
and  that,  if  hatred  was  his  impulse,  it  probably  grew  out 
of  the  treasury  case  "  insult."  My  understanding  of  the 
state  of  his  mind  is  that  before  that  incident,  LaFollette 
thought  only  of  continuing  his  Congressional  career.  Af- 
ter it,  he  was  for  anything  to  break  up  the  old  Sawyer 
machine.  Anyhow,  he  told  me  that,  after  the  Sawyer  meet- 
ing, he  made  up  his  mind  to  stay  home  and  break  up  the 
System  in  Wisconsin.  And,  LaFollette  did  not  originate 
all  that  legislation.  Wisconsin  was  one  of  the  four  original 
Granger  States.  There  seems  to  have  been  always  some 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  95 

discontent  with  the  abuse  of  the  power  of  the  railways, 
their  corrupting  influence,  and  their  escape  from  just 
taxation.  So  far  as  I  can  make  out,  however,  some  of  the 
modern  measures  labeled  LaFolletteism,  sprang  from  the 
head  of  a  certain  lean,  clean  Vermont  farmer,  who  came 
to  the  Legislature  from  Knapp,  Wisconsin.  I  went  to 
Knapp.  It  was  a  long  way  around  for  me,  but  it  paid, 
for  now  I  can  say  that  I  knew  A.  R.  Hall.  He  is  a  man. 
I  have  seen  in  my  day  some  seventeen  men,  real  men,  and 
none  of  them  is  simpler,  truer,  braver  than  this  ex-leader 
of  the  Wisconsin  Assembly;  none  thinks  he  is  more  of  a 
failure  and  none  is  more  of  a  success. 

Hall  knows  that  there  is  a  System  in  control  of  the 
land.  Sometimes  I  doubt  my  own  eyes,  but  Hall  knows  it 
in  his  heart,  which  is  sore  and  tired  from  the  struggle. 
He  went  to  the  Legislature  in  1891.  He  had  lived  in  Minne- 
sota and  had  served  as  an  Assemblyman  there.  When  he 
went  to  the  Legislature  in  Wisconsin,  one  of  the  first  de- 
mands upon  him  was  from  a  constituent  who  wanted  not 
a  pass,  but  several  passes  for  himself  and  others.  Hall 
laughed  at  the  extravagance  of  the  request,  but  when  he 
showed  it  to  a  colleague,  the  older  Assemblyman  took  it 
as  a  matter  of  course  and  told  him  he  could  get  all  the 
passes  he  cared  to  ask  for  from  the  railroad  lobbyists. 
"  I  had  taken  passes  myself  in  Minnesota,"  Hall  told  me, 
"  but  I  was  a  legislator ;  it  was  the  custom,  and  I  thought 
nothing  of  it."  A  little  inquiry  showed  him  that  the 
custom  in  Wisconsin  was  an  abuse  of  tremendous  di- 
mensions. Legislators  took  "  mileage "  for  themselves, 
their  families,  and  for  their  constituents  till  it  appeared 


96       STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

that  no  man  in  the  State  was  compelled  to  pay  his  fare. 
Hall  had  not  come  there  as  a  reformer;  like  the  best  re- 
formers I  have  known,  experience  of  the  facts  started  him 
going,  and  his  reforms  developed  as  if  by  accident  along 
empirical  lines.  Hall  says  he  realized  that  the  legislators 
had  to  deliver  votes — legislation — for  these  pass  privileges, 
and  he  drew  an  anti-pass  resolution  which  was  offered  as  an 
amendment  to  the  Constitution.  It  was  beaten.  Not  only 
the  politicians,  the  railroads  also  fought  it,  and  together 
they  won  in  that  session.  But  Hall,  mild-spoken  and  gentle, 
was  a  fighter,  so  the  anti-pass  measure  became  an  issue. 

One  day  Assemblyman  Hall  happened  to  see  the  state- 
ment of  earnings  of  a  railroad  to  its  stockholders.  Rail- 
roads in  Wisconsin  paid  by  way  of  taxes  a  percentage 
on  their  gross  receipts,  and,  as  Hall  looked  idly  over  the 
report,  he  wondered  how  the  gross  receipts  item  would 
compare  with  that  in  the  statement  to  the  State  Treasurer. 
He  went  quietly  about  his  investigation,  and  he  came  to 
the  conclusion  that,  counting  illegal  rebates,  the  State 
reports  were  from  two  to  five  millions  short.  So  he  asked 
for  a  committee  to  investigate,  and  he  introduced  also  a 
bill  for  a  State  railroad  commission  to  regulate  railroad 
rates.  This  was  beaten,  and  a  committee  which  was  sent 
to  Chicago  to  look  up  earnings  reported  for  the  rail- 
ways. But  this  was  not  enough.  Hall  was  "  unsafe  "  and 
he  must  be  kept  out  of  the  Legislature.  So,  in  1894, 
"  they  "  sent  down  into  Dunn  County  men  and  money  to 
beat  Hall  for  the  renomination.  They  got  the  shippers 
out  against  him  (the  very  men  who  were  at  the  mercy  of 
the  roads),  and  one  of  these  business  men  handled  the 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  97 

"  barrel "  which,  as  he  said  himself,  he  "  opened  at  both 
ends."  Hall  had  no  money  and  no  organization,  but  he 
knew  a  way  to  fight.  The  caucuses  were  held  in  different 
places  at  different  times,  and  Hall  went  about  posting  bills 
asking  the  voters  to  assemble  one  hour  before  time  and  lis- 
ten to  him.  At  these  preliminary  meetings  he  explained  just 
what  was  being  done  and  why ;  he  said  that  he  might  not  be 
right,  but  he  had  some  facts,  which  he  gave,  and  then  he 
declared  he  was  not  against  the  railroads,  that  he  only 
wished  to  make  sure  that  they  were  fulfilling  their  obliga- 
tions and  not  abusing  their  power.  "  I  had  only  been  trying 
to  serve  honorably  the  people  I  represented,  and  it  was  hard 
to  be  made  to  fight  for  your  political  life,  just  for  doing 
that.  But  we  won  out.  Those  voters  went  into  those  cau- 
cuses and  Dunn  County  beat  the  bribery.  They  then  tried 
to  buy  my  delegates." 

Mr.  Hall  was  leaning  against  the  railroad  station  as 
he  said  this.  We  had  gone  over  the  night  before,  his 
twelve  years'  fight,  up  to  his  retirement  the  year  before, 
and  we  were  repeating  now.  He  was  looking  back  over  it 
all,  and  a  hint  of  moisture  in  his  eyes  and  the  deep  lines 
in  his  good  face  made  me  ask: 

"  Does  it  pay,  Mr.  Hall?" 

"  Sometimes  I  think  it  does,  sometimes  I  think  it  doesn't. 

Yes,  it  does.  Dunn  County "  He  stopped.  "  Yes,  it 

does,"  he  added.  "  They  used  to  cartoon  me.  They  lam- 
pooned and  they  ridiculed,  they  abused  and  they  vilified. 
They  called  me  a  demagogue ;  said  I  was  ambitious ;  asked 
what  I  was  after,  just  as  they  do  LaFollette.  But  he  is  a 
fighter.  He  will  never  stop  fighting.  And  if  I  had  served 


98      STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

them,  I  could  have  had  anything,  just  as  he  could  now. 
It  is  hard  and  it  hurts,  when  you're  only  trying  to  do  your 
duty  and  be  fair.  But  it  does  pay.  They  don't  question 
my  motives  now,  any  more." 

No,  they  don't  question  Hall's  motives  any  more.  When 
"  they  "  became  most  heated  in  their  denunciations  of  the 
Governor  and  all  his  followers,  I  would  ask  them,  the  worst 
haters,  "What  about  A.  R.  Hall?  "  and  the  change  was 
instantaneous. 

"  Now,  there's  a  man,"  they  would  say ;  not  one,  but 
everybody  to  whom  I  mentioned  A.  R.  Hall.1 

When  LaFollette  began  his  open  fight  against  the  Sys- 
tem in  1894,  he  took  up  the  issues  of  inequalities  in  tax- 
ation, machine  politics,  and  primary  elections.  Hall  and 
LaFollette  were  friends  and  they  had  talked  over  these 
issues  together  in  LaFollette's  law  office  in  Madison,  dur- 
ing the  sessions.  "  They  "  say  in  Wisconsin  that  LaFol- 
lette is  an  opportunist.  They  say  true.  But  so  is  Folk  an 
opportunist,  and  so  are  the  Chicago  reformers — as  to 
specific  issues.  So  are  the  regular  politicians  who,  in 
Wisconsin,  for  example,  adopted  later  these  same  issues 
in  the  platform.  The  difference  is  this:  the  regulars 
wanted  only  to  keep  in  power  so  as  to  continue  the  profita- 
ble business  of  representing  the  railroads  and  other  special 
interests;  Hall  and  LaFollette  really  wanted  certain 
abuses  corrected,  and  LaFollette  was,  and  is,  for  any 
sound  issue  that  will  arouse  the  people  of  Wisconsin  to 
restore  representative  government. 

In  1894  LaFollette  carried  his  issues  to  the  State  con- 
vention with  a  candidate  for  Governor,  Nils  P.  Haugen, 
i  Mr.  Hall  died  June  2,  1905. 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  99 

a  Norse-American  who  had  served  in  Congress  and  as  a 
State  railroad  commissioner.  LaFollette  and  his  followers 
turned  up  with  one-third  of  the  delegates.  The  regulars, 
or  "  Stalwarts,"  as  they  afterward  were  called,  were 
divided,  but  Sawyer,  declaring  it  was  anybody  to  beat 
LaFollette,  managed  a  combination  on  W.  H.  Upham,  a 
lumberman,  and  Haugen  was  beaten.  Hall  was  there,  by 
the  way,  with  an  anti-pass  plank,  and  Hall  also  was 
beaten. 

The  contest  served  only  to  draw  a  line  between  the 
LaFollette  "  Halfbreeds  "  and  the  "  Stalwarts,"  and  both 
factions  went  to  work  on  their  organizations.  Upham  was 
elected,  and  the  Stalwarts,  who  had  been  living  on  federal 
patronage,  now  had  the  State.  They  rebuilt  their  State 
machine.  LaFollette,  with  no  patronage,  continued  to 
organize,  and  his  method  was  that  which  he  had  applied 
so  successfully  in  his  early  independent  fights  for  District 
Attorney  and  Congressman.  He  went  straight  to  the 
voters. 

"  They  "  say  in  Wisconsin  that  LaFollette  is  a  dema- 
gogue, and  if  it  is  demagogy  to  go  thus  straight  to  the 
voters,  then  "  they  "  are  right.  But  then  Folk  also  is  a 
demagogue,  and  so  are  all  thorough-going  reformers. 
LaFollette  from  the  beginning  has  asked,  not  the  bosses, 
but  the  people  for  what  he  wanted,  and  after  1894  he  sim- 
ply broadened  his  field  and  redoubled  his  efforts.  He  cir- 
cularized the  State,  he  made  speeches  every  chance  he  got, 
and  if  the  test  of  demagogy  is  the  tone  and  style  of  a 
man's  speeches,  LaFollette  is  the  opposite  of  a  dema- 
gogue. Capable  of  fierce  invective,  his  oratory  is  im- 


100     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

personal;  passionate  and  emotional  himself,  his  speeches 
are  temperate.  Some  of  them  are  so  loaded  with  facts 
and  such  closely  knit  arguments,  that  they  demand  care- 
ful reading,  and  their  effect  is  traced  to  his  delivery,  which 
is  forceful,  emphatic,  and  fascinating.  His  earnestness 
carries  the  conviction  of  sincerity,  and  the  conviction  of 
his  honesty  of  purpose  he  has  planted  all  over  the  State 
by  his  Halfbreed  methods. 

What  were  the  methods  of  the  Sawyer-Payne-Spooner 
Republicans?  In  1896  the  next  Governor  of  Wisconsin 
had  to  be  chosen.  The  Stalwarts  could  not  run  Governor 
Upham  again.  As  often  happens  to  "  safe  men,"  the  Sys- 
tem had  used  him  up ;  his  appointments  had  built  up  the 
machine,  his  approval  had  sealed  the  compromise  of  the 
treasury  cases.  Someone  else  must  run.  To  pick  out  his 
successor,  the  Stalwart  leaders  held  a  meeting  at  St. 
Louis,  where  they  were  attending  a  national  convention, 
and  they  chose  for  Governor  Edward  W.  Scofield.  There 
was  no  demagogy  about  that. 

LaFollette  wished  to  run  himself;  he  hoped  to  run  and 
win  while  Sawyer  lived,  and  he  was  holding  meetings,  too. 
But  his  meetings  were  all  over  the  State,  with  voters  and 
delegates,  and  he  was  making  headway.  Lest  he  might 
fall  short,  however,  LaFollette  made  a  political  bargain. 
He  confesses  it,  and  calls  it  a  political  sin,  but  he  thinks 
the  retribution  which  came  swift  and  hard  was  expiation. 
He  made  a  deal  with  Emil  Baensch,  by  which  both  should 
canvass  the  State  for  delegates,  with  the  understanding 
that  whichever  of  the  two  should  develop  the  greater 
strength  was  to  have  both  delegations.  LaFollette  says 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  101 

he  came  into  convention  with  enough  delegates  of  his  own 
to  nominate  him,  and  Boensch  had  seventy-five  or  so  besides. 
The  convention  adjourned  over  night  without  nominating 
and  the  next  morning  LaFollette  was  beaten.  He  had 
lost  some  of  his  own  delegates,  and  Baensch's  went  to 
Scofield. 

LaFollette's  lost  delegates  were  bought.  How  the 
Baensch  delegates  were  secured,  I  don't  know,  but  Baensch 
was  not  a  man  to  sell  for  money.  It  was  reported  to 
LaFollette  during  the  night  that  Baensch  was  going  over, 
and  LaFollette  wrestled  with  and  thought  he  had  won 
him  back,  till  the  morning  balloting  showed.  As  for  the 
rest,  the  facts  are  ample  to  make  plain  the  methods  of 
the  old  ring.  Sawyer  was  there ;  and  there  was  a  "  barrel." 
I  saw  men  who  saw  money  on  a  table  in  the  room  in  the 
Pfister  Hotel,  where  delegates  went  in  and  out,  and  news- 
paper men  present  at  the  time  told  me  the  story  in  great 
detail.  But  there  is  better  evidence  than  this.  Men  to 
whom  bribes  were  offered  reported  to  their  leader  that 
night.  The  first  warning  came  from  Captain  John  T. 
Rice,  of  Racine,  who  (as  Governor  LaFollette  recalls) 
said :  "  I  have  been  with  the  old  crowd  all  my  life  and  I 
thought  I  knew  the  worst,  but  they  have  no  right  to  ask 
me  to  do  what  they  did  to-night.  I  won't  tell  you  who, 
but  the  head  of  the  whole  business  asked  me  to  name  my 
price  for  turning  over  the  Union  Grove  delegation  from 
you  to  Scofield."  There  are  many  such  personal  state- 
ments, some  of  them  giving  prices — cash,  and  federal  and 
State  offices — and  some  giving  the  names  of  the  bribery 
agents.  The  Halfbreed  leaders  tried  to  catch  the  bribers 


102     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

with  witnesses,  but  failed,  and  at  midnight  Charles  F. 
Pfister,  a  Milwaukee  Stalwart  leader,  called  on  LaFol- 
lette,  who  repeated  to  me  what  he  said : 

"  LaFollette,  we've  got  you  beaten.  We've  got  your 
delegates.  It  won't  do  you  any  good  to  squeal,  and  if 
you'll  behave  yourself  we'll  take  care  of  you." 

So  LaFollette  had  to  go  on  with  his  fight.  He  would 
not  "  behave."  His  followers  wanted  him  to  lead  an  inde- 
pendent movement  for  Governor;  he  wouldn't  do  that,  but 
he  made  up  his  mind  to  lead  a  movement  for  reform 
within  the  party,  and  his  experience  with  corrupt  dele- 
gates set  him  to  thinking  about  methods  of  nomination.  The 
System  loomed  large  with  the  growth  of  corporate  wealth, 
the  power  of  huge  consolidations  over  the  individual,  and 
the  unscrupulous  use  of  both  money  and  power.  Democ- 
racy was  passing,  and  yet  the  people  were  sound.  Their 
delegates  at  home  were  representatives,  but  shipped  on 
passes  to  Milwaukee,  treated,  "  entertained,"  and  bribed, 
they  ceased  to  represent.  The  most  important  reform  was 
to  get  the  nomination  back  among  the  voters  themselves. 
Thus  LaFollette,  out  of  his  own  experience,  took  up  this 
issue — direct  primary  nominations  by  the  Australian 
ballot. 

During  the  next  two  years  LaFollette  made  a  propa- 
ganda with  this  issue  and  railroad  taxation,  the  taxation 
of  other  corporations — express  and  sleeping  car  com- 
panies which  paid  nothing — and  the  evils  of  a  corrupt 
machine  that  stood  for  corrupting  capital.  He  sent  out 
circulars  and  literature,  some  of  it  the  careful  writings 
of  scientific  authors,  but,  most  effective  of  all,  were  the 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  103 

speeches  he  made  at  the  county  fairs.  When  the  time  for 
the  next  Republican  State  convention  came  around  in 
1898,  he  held  a  conference  with  some  thirty  of  his  leaders 
in  Milwaukee,  and  he  urged  a  campaign  for  their  platform 
alone,  with  no  candidate.  The  others  insisted  that  LaFol- 
lette  run,  and  they  were  right  in  principle.  As  the  event 
proved,  the  Stalwarts  were  not  afraid  of  a  platform,  if 
they  could  be  in  office  to  make  and  carry  out  the  laws. 
LaFollette  ran  for  the  nomination  and  was  beaten — 
by  the  same  methods  that  were  employed  against  him  in 
'96;  cost  (insider's  estimate),  $8,000.  Scofield  was  re- 
nominated. 

But  the  LaFollette-Hall  platform  was  adopted — anti- 
pass,  corporation  taxation,  primary  election  reform,  and 
all.  "  They "  say  now  in  Wisconsin  that  LaFollette  is 
too  practical;  that  he  has  adopted  machine  methods,  etc. 
During  1896,  1897,  and  1898  they  were  saying  he  was 
an  impracticable  reformer,  and  yet  here  they  were  adopt- 
ing his  impracticable  theories.  And  they  enacted  some  of 
these  reforms.  The  agitation  (for  LaFollette  is  indeed  an 
"  agitator  ")  made  necessary  some  compliance  with  public 
demand  and  platform  promises,  so  Hall  got  his  anti-pass 
law  at  last;  a  commission  to  investigate  taxation  was  ap- 
pointed, and  there  was  some  other  good  legislation.  Yet, 
as  Mr.  Hall  said,  "  In  effect,  that  platform  was  repudi- 
ated." The  railway  commission  reported  that  the  larger 
companies,  the  Chicago,  Milwaukee  &  St.  Paul  and  the 
Northwestern,  respectively,  did  not  pay  their  propor- 
tionate share  of  the  taxes,  and  a  bill  was  introduced  by 
Hall  to  raise  their  assessments.  It  passed  the  House,  but 


104     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

the  Senate  had  and  has  a  "  combine  "  like  the  Senates  of 
Missouri  and  Illinois,  and  the  combine  beat  the  bill. 

The  failures  of  the  Legislature  left  all  questions  open, 
and  LaFollette  and  his  followers  continued  their  agitation. 
Meanwhile  Senator  Sawyer  died,  and  when  the  next 
gubernatorial  election  (1900)  approached,  all  hope  of 
beating  LaFollette  was  gone.  The  Stalwarts  began  to 
come  to  him  with  offers  of  support.  One  of  the  first  to 
surrender  was  J.  W.  Babcock,  Congressman  and  national 
politician.  Others  followed,  but  not  John  C.  Spooner, 
Payne,  and  Pfister,  not  yet.  They  brought  out  for  the 
nomination  John  M.  Whitehead,  a  State  Senator  with  a 
clean  reputation  and  a  good  record.  But  in  May  (1900) 
LaFollette  announced  his  candidacy  on  a  ringing  plat- 
form, and  he  went  campaigning  down  into  the  strongest 
Stalwart  counties.  He  carried  enough  of  them  to  take 
the  heart  out  of  the  old  ring.  All  other  candidates  with- 
drew, and  Senator  Spooner,  who  is  a  timid  man,  wrote  a 
letter  which,  in  view  of  his  subsequent  stand  for  reelection, 
is  a  remarkable  document;  it  declared  that  he  was  un- 
alterably determined  not  to  run  again  for  the  Senate. 
LaFollette  was  nominated  unanimously,  and  his  own  plat- 
form was  adopted.  The  victory  was  complete.  Though 
the  implacable  Stalwarts  supported  the  Democratic  candi- 
date, LaFollette  was  elected  by  102,000  plurality. 

Victory  for  reform  is  often  defeat,  and  this  triumph 
of  LaFollette,  apparently  so  complete,  was  but  the  begin- 
ning of  the  greatest  fight  of  all  in  Wisconsin,  the  fight 
that  is  being  waged  out  there  now.  Governor  LaFollette 
was  inaugurated  January  7,  1901.  The  legislature  was 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  105 

overwhelmingly  Republican  and  apparently  there  was 
perfect  harmony  in  the  party.  The  Governor  believed 
there  was.  The  Stalwart-Halfbreed  lines  were  not  sharply 
drawn.  The  Half  breeds  counted  a  majority,  especially  in 
the  House,  and  A.  R.  Hall  was  the  "  logical  "  candidate 
for  Speaker.  It  was  understood  that  he  coveted  the  honor, 
but  he  proposed  and  it  was  decided  that,  in  the  interest 
of  peace  and  fair  play,  a  Stalwart  should  take  the  chair. 
The  Governor  says  that  the  first  sign  he  had  of  trouble 
was  in  the  newspapers  which,  the  day  after  the  organiza- 
tion of  the  legislature,  reported  that  the  Stalwarts  con- 
trolled and  that  there  would  be  no  primary  election  or 
tax  legislation.  The  Governor,  undaunted,  sent  in  a  firm 
message  calling  for  the  performance  of  all  platform  prom- 
ises, and  bills  to  carry  out  these  pledges  were  introduced 
under  the  direction  of  the  LaFollette  leaders,  Hall  and 
Judge  E.  Ray  Stevens,  the  authority  of  the  primary 
election  bill.  These  developed  the  opposition.  There  were 
two  (alternative)  railway  tax  bills;  others  to  tax  other 
corporations ;  and,  later,  a  primary  election  bill — nothing 
that  was  not  promised  by  a  harmonious  party,  yet  the  out- 
cry was  startling  and  the  fight  that  followed  was  furious. 
Why? 

I  have  seen  enough  of  the  System  to  believe  that  that 
is  the  way  it  works.  Just  such  opposition,  with  just  such 
cries  of  "  boss,"  "  dictator,"  etc.,  arise  against  any  Gov- 
ernors who  try  to  govern  in  the  interest  of  the  people. 
And  I  believe  they  will  find  their  Legislatures  organ- 
ized and  corrupted  against  them.  But  in  the  case  of 
LaFollette  there  was  a  "  misunderstanding."  In  the 


106     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

year  (1900)  when  everything  was  LaFollette,  Congress- 
man Babcock,  Postmaster-General  Payne,  and  others 
sought  to  bring  together  the  great  ruling  special  interests 
and  the  inevitable  Governor.  Governor  LaFollette  said, 
like  President  Roosevelt,  that  he  would  represent  the 
corporations  of  his  State,  just  as  he  would  represent  all 
other  interests  and  persons;  but  no  more.  He  would  be 
"  fair."  Well,  that  was  "  all  we  want,"  they  said,  and 
the  way  seemed  smooth.  It  was  like  the  incident  in  St. 
Louis  when  Folk  told  the  boodlers  he  would  "  do  his 
duty,"  and  the  boodlers  answered,  "  Of  course,  old  man." 
But  some  railroad  men  said  LaFollette  promised  in 
writing  to  consult  with  them  before  bringing  in  railroad 
bills;  there  was  a  certain  famous  letter  written  in  the 
spring  of  1900  to  Thomas  H.  Gill,  an  old  friend  of  the 
Governor,  who  is  counsel  to  the  Wisconsin  Central  Rail- 
road; this  letter  put  the  Governor  on  record.  Everywhere 
I  went  I  heard  of  this  document,  and  though  the  noise  of 
it  had  resounded  through  the  State  for  four  years,  it  had 
never  been  produced.  Here  it  is : 

MADISON,  Wis.,  May  12th,  1900. 
DEAR  TOM: 

You  have  been  my  personal  and  political  friend  for  twenty 
years.  Should  I  become  a  candidate  for  the  nomination  for 
Governor,  I  want  your  continued  support,  if  you  can  con- 
sistently accord  it  to  me.  But  you  are  the  attorney  for  the 
Wisconsin  Central  R.  R.  Co.,  and  I  am  not  willing  that  you 
should  be  placed  in  any  position  where  you  could  be  subjected 
to  any  criticism  or  embarrassment  with  your  employers  upon 
my  account.  For  this  reason,  I  desire  to  state  to  you  in  so 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  107 

far  as  I  am  able  my  position  in  relation  to  the  question  of 
railway  taxation,  which  has  now  become  one  of  public  interest, 
and  is  likely  to  so  continue  until  rightly  settled.  This  I  can 
do  in  a  very  few  words. 

Railroad  corporations  should  pay  neither  more  nor  less  than 
a  justly  proportionate  share  of  taxes  with  the  other  taxable 
property  of  the  State.  If  I  were  in  a  position  to  pass  officially 
upon  a  bill  to  change  existing  law,  it  would  be  my  first  care 
to  know  whether  the  rate  therein  proposed  was  just  in  pro- 
portion to  the  property  of  other  corporations  and  individuals 
as  then  taxed,  or  as  therein  proposed  to  be  taxed.  The  de- 
termination of  that  question  would  be  controlling.  If  such 
rate  was  less  than  the  justly  proportionate  share  which  should 
be  borne  by  the  railroads,  then  I  should  favor  increasing  it 
to  make  it  justly  proportionate.  If  the  proposed  rate  was  more 
than  the  justly  proportionate  share,  in  comparison  with  the 
property  of  other  corporations,  and  of  individuals  taxed  under 
the  law,  then  I  should  favor  decreasing  to  make  it  justly 
proportionate. 

In  other  words,  I  would  favor  equal  and  exact  justice  to 
each  individual  and  to  every  interest,  yielding  neither  to 
clamor  on  the  one  hand,  nor  being  swerved  from  the  straight 
course  by  any  interest  upon  the  other.  This  position,  I  am 
sure,  is  the  only  one  which  could  commend  itself  to  you,  and 
cannot  be  criticised  by  any  legitimate  business  honestly 
managed. 

The  Mr.  Gill  to  whom  this  letter  was  addressed  is  one  of 
the  most  enlightened  and  fair-minded  corporation  lawyers 
that  I  ever  met,  even  in  the  West,  where  corporation  men 
also  are  enlightened.  He  convinced  me  that  he  and  the  other 
railroad  men  really  did  expect  more  consideration  than 


108     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

the  Governor  gave  them,  and  so  there  may  have  been  a 
genuine  misunderstanding.  But  after  what  I  have  seen  in 
Chicago,  St.  Louis,  and  Pittsburg,  and  in  Missouri  and 
Illinois  and  the  United  States,  I  almost  am  persuaded  that 
no  honest  official  in  power  can  meet  the  expectations  of 
great  corporations ;  they  have  been  spoiled,  like  bad 
American  children,  and  are  ever  ready  to  resort  to  corrup- 
tion and  force.  That  was  their  recourse  now. 

Governor  LaFollette  says  he  learned  afterward  that 
during  the  campaign,  the  old,  corrupt  ring  went  about 
in  the  legislative  districts,  picking  and  "  fixing "  legis- 
lators, and  that  the  plan  was  to  discredit  him  with  defeat 
by  organizing  the  Legislature  against  him.  However  this 
may  be,  it  is  certain  that  when  his  bills  were  under  way, 
there  was  a  rush  to  the  lobby  at  Madison.  The  regular 
lobbyists  were  reinforced  with  special  agents;  local  Stal- 
wart leaders  were  sent  for,  and  federal  officeholders ; 
United  States  Senators  hurried  home,  and  Congressmen ; 
and  boodle,  federal  patronage,  force,  and  vice  were  em- 
ployed to  defeat  bills  promised  in  the  platform.  Here  is 
a  statement  by  Irvine  L.  Lenroot,  now  the  Speaker  of  the 
Assembly.  He  says: 

"  From  the  first  day  of  the  session  the  railroad  lobby- 
ists were  on  the  ground  in  force,  offering  courtesies  and 
entertainments  of  various  kinds  to  the  members.  Bribery 
is  a  hard  word,  a  charge,  which  never  should  be  made 
unless  it  can  be  substantiated.  The  writer  has  no  personal 
knowledge  of  money  being  actually  offered  or  received  for 
votes  against  the  bill.  It  was,  however,  generally  under- 
stood in  the  Assembly  that  any  member  favoring  the  bill 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  109 

could  better  his  financial  condition  if  he  was  willing  to 
vote  against  it.  Members  were  approached  by  represen- 
tatives of  the  companies  and  offered  lucrative  positions. 
This  may  not  have  been  done  with  any  idea  of  influencing 
votes. 

"  The  reader  will  draw  his  own  conclusions.  It  was  a 
matter  of  common  knowledge  that  railroad  mileage  could 
be  procured  if  a  member  was  *  right.'  Railroad  lands 
could  be  purchased  very  cheaply  by  members  of  the  Legis- 
lature. It  was  said  if  a  member  would  get  into  a  poker 
game  with  a  lobbyist,  the  member  was  sure  to  win.  Mem- 
bers opposed  to  Governor  LaFollette  were  urged  to  vote 
against  the  bill,  because  he  wanted  it  to  pass.  A  promi- 
nent member  stated  that  he  did  not  dare  to  vote  for  the 
bill,  because  he  was  at  the  mercy  of  the  railroad  companies, 
and  he  was  afraid  they  would  ruin  his  business  by  ad- 
vancing his  rates,  if  he  voted  for  it." 

I  went  to  Superior  and  saw  Mr.  Lenroot,  and  he  told 
me  that  one  of  the  "  members  approached  by  represen- 
tatives of  the  companies  and  offered  positions  "  was  him- 
self. He  gave  his  bribery  stories  in  detail,  and  enabled 
me  to  run  down  and  verify  others ;  but  the  sentence  that 
interested  me  most  in  his  statement  was  the  last.  The 
member  who  did  not  dare  vote  for  the  railway  tax  bill, 
lest  the  railways  raise  the  freight  on  his  goods  and  ruin 
his  business,  confessed  to  Governor  LaFollette  and  others. 
Another  member  stated  that  in  return  for  his  treason  to 
his  constituents,  a  railroad  quoted  him  a  rate  that  would 
give  him  an  advantage  over  his  competitors. 

Well,  these  methods  succeeded.  The  policy  of  the  ad- 


110     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

ministration  was  not  carried  out.  Some  good  bills  passed, 
but  the  session  was  a  failure.  Not  content  with  this  tri- 
umph, however,  the  System  went  to  work  to  beat  LaFol- 
lette,  and  to  accomplish  this  end,  LaFollette's  methods 
were  adopted,  or,  rather,  adapted.  A  systematic  appea) 
was  to  be  made  to  public  opinion.  A  meeting  of  the  lead- 
ing Stalwarts  was  held  in  the  eleventh  story  of  an  office 
building  in  Milwaukee,  and  a  Permanent  Republican 
League  of  the  State  of  Wisconsin  was  organized.  This 
became  known  as  the  "  Eleventh  Story  League."  A  mani- 
festo was  put  out  "  viewing  with  alarm  "  the  encroach- 
ments of  the  executive  upon  the  legislative  branch  of  the 
government,"  etc.,  etc.  (The  encroachments  of  boodle 
business  upon  all  branches  of  the  government  is  all  right.) 
An  army  of  canvassers  was  dispatched  over  the  State  to 
interview  personally  every  voter  in  the  State  and  leave 
with  him  books  and  pamphlets.  Now  this  was  democratic 
and  fair,  but  that  League  did  one  thing  which  is  enough 
alone  to  condemn  the  whole  movement.  It  corrupted  part 
of  the  country  press.  This  is  not  hearsay.  The  charge 
was  made  at  the  time  these  papers  swung  round  suddenly, 
and  the  League  said  it  did  not  bribe  the  editors ;  it  "  paid 
for  space  for  League  editorial  matter,  and  for  copies  of 
the  paper  to  be  circulated."  This  is  bribery,  as  any  news- 
paper man  knows.  But  there  was  also  what  even  the 
League  business  man  would  call  bribery;  newspaper  men 
all  over  the  State  told  me  about  direct  purchase — and 
cheap,  too.  It  is  sickening,  but,  for  final  evidence,  I  saw 
affidavits,  published  in  Wisconsin,  by  newspaper  men,  who 
were  approached  with  offers  which  they  refused,  and  by 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  111 

others  who  sold  out,  then  threw  up  their  contracts  and  re- 
turned the  bribes,  for  shame  or  other  reasons. 

These  "  democratic "  methods  failed.  When  the  time 
arrived  for  the  next  Republican  State  convention,  the 
Stalwarts  found  that  the  people  had  sent  up  delegates  in- 
structed for  LaFollette,  and  he  was  nominated  for  a 
second  term.  What  could  the  Stalwarts  do?  They  weren't 
even  "  regular  "  now.  LaFollette  had  the  party,  they  had 
only  the  federal  patronage  and  the  Big  Business  System. 
But  the  System  had  resources.  Wherever  a  municipal  re- 
form movement  has  hewed  to  the  line,  the  leaders  of  it,  like 
Folk  and  the  Chicago  reformers,  have  seen  the  forces  of 
corruption  retire  from  one  party  to  the  other  and  from 
the  city  to  the  State.  This  Wisconsin  movement  for  State 
reform  now  had  a  similar  experience.  The  Wisconsin  Sys- 
tem, driven  out  of  the  Republican,  went  over  to  the  Dem- 
ocratic party ;  that  had  not  been  reformed ;  beaten  out 
of  power  in  the  State,  it  retreated  to  the  towns ;  they  had 
not  been  reformed. 

The  System  in  many  of  the  Wisconsin  municipalities 
was  intact.  There  had  been  no  serious  municipal  reform 
movements  anywhere,  and  the  citizens  of  Milwaukee,  Osh- 
kosh,  Green  Bay,  etc.,  were  pretty  well  satisfied,  and  they 
are  still,  apparently.  "  We're  nothing  like  Minneapolis, 
St.  Louis,  and  the  rest,"  they  told  me  with  American 
complacency.  Green  Bay  was  exactly  like  Minneapolis; 
we  know  it  because  the  wretched  little  place  has  been  ex- 
posed since.  And  Marinette  and  Oshkosh,  unexposed,  are 
said  by  insiders  to  be  "  just  like  Green  Bay."  As  for 
Milwaukee,  that  is  St.  Louis  all  over  again. 


112     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

District  Attorney  Bennett  has  had  grand  juries  at  work 
in  Milwaukee  since  1901,  and  he  has  some  forty-two  per- 
sons indicted — twelve  aldermen,  ten  supervisors,  nine  other 
officials,  one  State  Senator,  and  ten  citizens ;  four  convic- 
tions and  three  pleas  of  guilty.  The  grafting  so  far  ex- 
posed is  petty,  but  the  evidence  in  hand  indicates  a  highly 
perfected  boodle  system.  The  Republicans  had  the  county, 
the  Democrats  the  city,  and  both  the  council  and  the  board 
of  supervisors  had  combines  which  grafted  on  contracts, 
public  institutions,  franchises,  and  other  business  privileges. 
The  corrupt  connection  of  business  and  politics  was  shown ; 
the  informants  were  merchants  and  contractors,  mostly 
small  men,  who  confessed  to  bribery.  The  biggest  caught 
so  far  is  Colonel  Pabst,  the  brewer,  who  paid  a  check  of 
$1,500  for  leave  to  break  a  building  law.  But  all  signs  point 
higher  than  beer,  to  more  "  legitimate "  political  busi- 
ness. As  in  Chicago,  a  bank  is  the  center  of  this  graft,2 
and  public  utility  companies  are  back  of  it.  The  politicians 
in  the  boards  of  management,  now  or  formerly,  show  that. 
It  is  a  bipartisan  system  all  through.  Henry  C.  Payne, 
while  chairman  of  the  Republican  State  Central  Com- 
mittee, and  E.  C.  Wall  (the  man  the  Wisconsin  Democ- 
racy offered  to  the  National  Democratic  Convention  for 
President  of  the  United  States),  while  chairman  of  the 
Democratic  State  Central  Committee,  engineered  a  con- 
solidation of  Milwaukee  street  railway  and  electric  lighting 
companies,  and,  when  the  job  was  done,  Payne  became 
manager  of  the  street  railway,  Wall  of  the  light  company. 

iThe  First  National  Bank,  the  president  of  which  is  now  in  the 
penitentiary. 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  113 

But  this  was  "  business."  There  was  no  scandal  about  it. 
The  great  scandal  of  Milwaukee  was  the  extension  of  street 
railway  franchises,  and  the  men  who  put  that  through  were 
Charles  F.  Pfister,  the  Stalwart  Republican  boss,  and 
David  S.  Rose,  the  Stalwart  Democratic  Mayor.  Money 
was  paid;  the  extension  was  boodled  through.  The  Mil- 
waukee Sentinel  reprinted  a  paragraph  saying  Pfister, 
among  others,  did  the  bribing,  and  thus  it  happened  that 
the  Stalwarts  got  that  paper.  Pfister  sued  for  libel,  but 
when  the  editors  (now  on  the  Milwaukee  Free  Press)  made 
answer  that  their  defense  would  be  proof  of  the  charge, 
the  millionaire  traction  man  bought  the  paper  and  its 
evidence,  too.  It  is  no  more  than  fair  to  add — as  Milwau- 
kee newspaper  men  always  do  (with  delight) — that  the 
paper  had  very  little  evidence,  not  nearly  so  much  as 
Pfister  seemed  to  think  it  had.  As  for  Mayor  Rose,  his 
friends  declare  that  he  has  told  them,  personally  and  con- 
vincingly, that  he  got  not  one  cent  for  his  service.  But 
that  is  not  the  point.  Mayor  Rose  fought  to  secure  for 
special  interests  a  concession  which  sacrificed  the  com- 
mon interests  of  his  city.  I  am  aware  that  he  defends  the 
terms  of  the  grants  as  fair,  and  they  would  seem  so  in  the 
East,  but  the  West  is  intelligent  on  special  privileges,  and 
Mayor  Rose  lost  to  Milwaukee  the  chance  Chicago  seized 
to  tackle  the  public  utility  problem.  Moreover,  Rose  knew 
that  his  council  was  corrupt  before  it  was  proven  so;  he 
told  two  business  men  that  they  couldn't  get  a  privilege 
they  sought  honestly  from  him  without  bribing  aldermen. 
Yet  he  ridiculed  as  "  hot  air  "  an  investigation  which 
produced  evidence  enough  to  defeat  at  the  polls,  in  a 


114     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

self-respecting  city,  the  head  of  an  administration  so  be- 
smirched. Nevertheless,  Milwaukee  reflected  Rose ;  good  citi- 
zens say  that  they  gave  the  man  the  benefit  of  the  doubt 
— the  man,  not  the  city. 

But  this  is  not  the  only  explanation.  The  System  was  on 
trial  with  Mayor  Rose  in  that  election,  and  the  System 
saved  its  own.  The  Republicans,  with  the  Rose  administra- 
tion exposed,  had  a  chance  to  win,  and  they  nominated 
a  good  man,  Mr.  Guy  D.  Goff.  Pfister,  the  Stalwart  Re- 
publican boss,  seemed  to  support  Goff ;  certainly  the  young 
candidate  had  no  suspicion  to  the  contrary.  He  has  now, 
however.  When  the  returns  came  in  showing  that  he  was 
beaten,  Mr.  Goff  hunted  up  Mr.  Pfister,  and  he  found  him. 
Mr.  Goff,  the  Republican  candidate  for  Mayor,  found 
Charles  F.  Pfister,  the  Stalwart  Republican  boss,  rejoicing 
over  the  drinks  with  the  elected  Democratic  Mayor,  David 
S.  Rose! 

I  guess  Mr.  Goff  knows  that  a  bipartisan  System  rules 
Milwaukee,  and,  by  the  same  token,  Governor  LaFollette 
knows  that  there  is  a  bipartisan  System  in  Wisconsin. 
For  when  Governor  LaFollette  beat  the  Stalwarts  in  the 
Republican  State  convention  of  1902,  those  same  Stalwarts 
combined  with  the  Democrats.  Democrats  told  me  that 
the  Republican  Stalwarts  dictated  the  "  Democratic  "  anti- 
LaFollette  platform,  and  that  Pfister,  the  "  Republican  " 
boss,  named  the  "  safe  man "  chosen  for  the  "  Demo- 
cratic "  candidate  for  Governor  to  run  against  LaFollette 
— said  David  S.  Rose. 

"  They  "  say  in  Wisconsin  that  LaFollette  is  a  Demo- 
crat ;  that  "  he  appeals  to  Democratic  voters."  He  does. 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  115 

He  admits  it,  but  he  adds  that  it  is  indeed  to  the  Demo- 
cratic voters  that  he  appeals — not  to  the  Democratic 
machine.  And  he  gets  Democratic  votes.  "  They  "  com- 
plain that  he  has  split  the  Republican  party ;  he  has,  and 
he  has  split  the  Democratic  party,  too.  When  "  they  " 
united  the  two  party  rings  of  the  bipartisan  System 
against  LaFollette  in  1902,  he  went  out  after  the  voters 
of  both  parties,  and  those  voters  combined;  they  beat 
Rose,  the  two  rings,  and  the  System.  The  people  of  Wis- 
consin reelected  LaFollette,  the  "  unsafe,"  and  that  is  why 
the  trouble  is  so  great  in  Wisconsin.  The  System  there  is 
down. 

There  is  a  machine,  but  it  is  LaFollette's.  When  he  was 
reelected,  the  Governor  organized  his  party,  and  I  think 
no  other  of  his  offenses  is  quite  so  heinous  in  Stalwart 
eyes.  They  wanted  me  to  expose  him  as  a  boss  who  had 
used  State  patronage  to  build  up  an  organization.  I  re- 
minded "  them  "  that  their  federal  patronage  is  greater 
than  LaFollette's  State  patronage,  and  I  explained  that 
my  prejudice  was  not  against  organization;  their  kind 
everywhere  had  been  urging  me  so  long  to  believe  that 
organization  was  necessary  in  politics  that  I  was  disposed 
to  denounce  only  those  machines  that  sold  out  the  party 
and  the  people.  And  as  for  the  "  boss  " — it  is  not  the  boss 
in  an  elective  office  where  he  is  responsible  that  is  so  bad, 
but  the  irresponsible  boss  back  of  a  safe  figurehead;  this 
is  the  man  that  is  really  dangerous.  They  declared,  how- 
ever, that  Governor  LaFollette  had  sacrificed  good  service 
to  the  upbuilding  of  his  machine.  This  is  a  serious  charge. 
I  did  not  go  thoroughly  into  it.  Cases  which  I  investi- 


116     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

gated  at  Stalwart  behest,  held,  with  one  exception,  very 
little  water,  and  I  put  no  faith  in  the  rest.  But,  for  the 
sake  of  argument,  let  us  admit  that  the  departments  are 
not  all  that  they  should  be.  What  then?  As  in  Chicago, 
the  fight  in  Wisconsin  is  for  self-government,  not  "  good  " 
government ;  it  is  a  fight  to  reestablish  a  government 
representative  of  all  the  people.  Given  that;  remove  from 
control  the  Big  Business  and  the  Bad  Politics  that  corrupt 
all  branches  of  the  government,  and  "  good  "  government 
will  come  easily  enough.  But  Big  Business  and  Bad  Poli- 
tics are  hard  to  beat. 

The  defeat  of  Rose  did  not  beat  them.  The  Stalwarts 
still  had  the  Senate,  and  they  manned  the  lobby  to  beat  the 
railroad  tax  and  the  primary  election  bills.  But  Governor 
LaFollette  outplayed  them  at  the  great  game.  He  long 
had  been  studying  the  scheme  for  a  State  commission  to 
regulate  railway  freight  rates.  It  was  logical.  If  their 
taxes  were  increased  the  roads  could  take  the  difference 
out  of  the  people  by  raising  freight  rates.  Other  States 
had  such  commissions,  and  in  some  of  them,  notably  Iowa 
and  Illinois,  the  rates  were  lower  than  in  Wisconsin.  More- 
over, we  all  know  railroads  give  secret  rebates  and  other- 
wise discriminate  in  favor  of  individuals  and  localities. 

When  then,  the  battle  lines  were  drawn  on  the  old  bills  in 
the  Legislature  of  1903,  the  Governor  threw  into  the  fight 
a  bristling  message  calling  for  a  commission  to  regulate 
railway  rates.  The  effect  was  startling.  "  Populism ! " 
"  Socialism !  "  "  they  "  cried,  and  they  turned  to  rend  this 
new  bill.  They  let  the  tax  bill  go  through  to  fight  this 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  117 

fresh  menace  to  "  business."  They  held  out  against  the 
primary  election  bill  also,  for  if  that  passed  they  feared 
the  people  might  keep  LaFollette  in  power  forever.  Even 
that,  however,  they  let  pass  finally,  with  an  amendment 
for  a  referendum.  Concentrating  upon  the  rate  commission 
bill,  Big  Business  organized  business  men's  mass  meetings 
throughout  the  State,  and  with  the  help  of  favored  or 
timid  shippers,  sent  committees  to  Madison  to  protest  to 
the  Legislature.  Thus  this  bill  in  the  interests  of  fair  busi- 
ness was  beaten  by  business,  and,  with  the  primary  election 
referendum,  is  an  issue  in  this  year's  campaign  (1904). 

As  I  have  tried  to  show,  however,  the  fundamental  issue 
lies  deeper.  The  people  of  Wisconsin  understand  this.  The 
Stalwarts  dread  the  test  at  the  polls.  But  what  other 
appeal  was  there?  They  knew  one.  When  the  Republican 
State  convention  met  this  year,  the  Stalwarts  bolted; 
whatever  the  result  might  have  been  of  a  fight  in  the  con- 
vention, they  avoided  it  and  held  a  separate  convention  in 
another  hall,  which,  by  the  way,  they  had  hired  in  advance. 
The  Halfbreeds  renominated  LaFollette;  the  Stalwarts 
put  up  another  ticket.  To  the  Stalwart  convention 
came  Postmaster-General  Payne,  United  States  Senators 
Spooner  and  Quarles,  Stalwart  Congressmen  and  federal 
officeholders — the  Federal  System.  The  broken  State 
System  was  appealing  to  the  United  States  System,  and 
the  Republican  National  Convention  at  Chicago  was  to 
decide  the  case.  And  it  did  decide — for  the  System.  I  at- 
tended that  convention,  and  heard  what  was  said  privately 
and  honestly.  The  Republicans  who  decided  for  Payne- 


118     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

Spooner-Pfister-Babcock,   et    al.,   said    "  LaFollette    isn't 
really  a  Republican  anyhow." 

Isn't  he?  That  is  a  most  important  question.  True,  he 
is  very  democratic  essentially.  He  helped  to  draw  the  Mc- 
Kinley  tariff  law  and  he  is  standing  now  on  the  national 
Republican  platform ;  his  democracy  consists  only  in  the 
belief  that  the  citizens  elected  to  represent  the  people 
should  represent  the  people,  not  the  corrupt  special 
interests.  Both  parties  should  be  democratic  in  that  sense. 
But  they  aren't.  Too  often  we  have  found  both  parties 
representing  graft — big  business  graft.  The  people,  es- 
pecially in  the  West,  are  waking  to  a  realization  of  this 
state  of  things,  and  (taking  a  hint  from  the  Big  Grafters) 
they  are  following  leaders  who  see  that  the  way  to  restore 
government  representative  of  the  common  interests  of  the 
city  or  State,  is  to  restore  to  public  opinion  the  control 
of  the  dominant  party.  The  Democrats  of  Missouri  have 
made  their  party  democratic;  the  Republicans  of  Illinois 
have  made  their  party  democratic.  The  next  to  answer 
should  be  the  people  of  Wisconsin.  The  Stalwarts  hope 
the  courts  will  decide.  They  hope  their  courts  will  uphold 
the  decision  of  the  National  Republican  Party,  that  they, 
who  represent  all  that  is  big  and  bad  in  business  and  poli- 
tics, are  the  regular  "  Republicans."  This  isn't  right.  The 
people  of  Wisconsin  are  not  radicals ;  they  are  law-abiding, 
conservative,  and  fair.  They  will  lay  great  store  by  what 
their  courts  shall  rule,  but  this  is  a  question  that  should  be 
left  wholly  to  the  people  themselves.  And  they  are  to  be 
trusted,  for  no  matter  how  men  may  differ  about  Gov- 
ernor LaFollette  otherwise,  his  long,  hard  fight  has 


GOVERNMENT    RESTORED  119 

developed  citizenship  in  Wisconsin — honest,  reasonable, 
intelligent  citizenship.  And  that  is  better  than  "  busi- 
ness " ;  that  is  what  business  and  government  are  for — 
men.3 

3  Governor  LaFollette  was  reflected  by  a  large  plurality ;  he  was 
chosen  United  States  Senator,  but  he  served  one  year  as  governor 
before  he  accepted  his  seat  in  the  Senate. 


RHODE    ISLAND:    A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE 

SHOWING    THAT     AMERICAN    CITIZENS     CAN     BE 

BOUGHT     (CHEAP)     TO    SELL    OUT     THEIR 

CITIES    AND    STATES 

(February,  1905) 

THE  political  condition  of  Rhode  Island  is  notorious, 
acknowledged,  and  it  is  shameful.  But  the  Rhode  Islander 
resents  the  interest  of  his  neighbors.  "  Our  evils  are  our 
troubles,"  he  says ;  "  they  don't  concern  the  rest  of  you. 
Why  should  we  be  singled  out?  We  are  no  worse  than 
others.  We  are  better  than  some;  we  want  to  set  things 
right,  but  can't.  Conditions  are  peculiar." 

This  is  all  wrong.  The  evils  of  Rhode  Island  concern 
every  man,  woman,  and  child  in  our  land.  For  example : 

The  United  States  Senate  is  coming  more  and  more  to 
be  the  actual  head  of  the  United  States  Government.  In 
the  Senate  there  is  a  small  ring  (called  the  Steering  Com- 
mittee) which  is  coming  more  and  more  to  be  the  head  of 
the  United  States  Senate.  The  head  of  this  committee  is 
Senator  Nelson  W.  Aldrich,  who  has  been  described  as 
"  the  boss  of  the  United  States,"  "  the  power  behind  the 
power  behind  the  throne,"  "  the  general  manager  of  the 
United  States."  The  fitness  of  these  titles  is  questioned,  but 
it  is  a  question  of  national  politics,  and  all  I  know  to  the 
point  in  that  field  is  what  everybody  knows:  that  Senator 

120 


A   CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  121 

Aldrich,  a  very  rich  man  and  father-in-law  of  young  Mr. 
Rockefeller,  is  supposed  to  represent  "  Sugar,"  "  Standard 
Oil,"  "  New  York,"  and,  more  broadly,  "  Wall  Street  " ;  our 
leading  legislative  authority  on  protective  tariff,  he  speaks 
for  privileged  business ;  the  chairman  of  the  Senate  Finance 
Committee,  he  stands  for  high  finance.  These  facts  and 
suppositions,  taken  together  with  the  praises  I  have  heard 
of  him  in  Wall  Street  and  the  comfortable  faith  he  seems 
to  inspire  in  business  men  all  over  the  country,  suggest 
that  we  have  in  Senator  Aldrich  the  commercial  ideal  of 
political  character,  and — if  not  the  head — at  least  the 
political  representative  of  the  head  of  that  System  which 
is  coming  more  and  more  to  take  the  place  of  the  passing 
paper  government  of  the  United  States. 

What  sort  of  a  man  is  Senator  Aldrich?  What  school 
of  politics  did  he  attend,  what  school  of  business?  What 
kind  of  a  government  is  it  that  forms  the  traditions  and 
perhaps  the  ideal  of  the  most  powerful  man  in  our  national 
legislature?  What  kind  of  a  government  does  he  give  his 
own  people  in  his  own  State?  In  brief,  what  is  the  System 
that  he  has  produced  and  that  has  produced  him?  These 
are  questions  of  national  interest,  and  Rhode  Island  can 
answer  them.  Mr.  Aldrich  is  the  senior  Senator  for  Rhode 
Island  and  Providence  Plantations. 

And  Rhode  Island  throws  light  on  another  national 
question,  a  question  that  is  far  more  important:  Aren't 
the  people  themselves  dishonest?  The  "  grafters  "  who 
batten  on  us  say  so.  Politicians  have  excused  their  own 
corruption  to  me  time  and  again  by  declaring  that  "  we're 
all  corrupt,"  and  promoters  and  swindlers  alike  describe 


STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

their  victims  as  "  smart  folk  who  think  to  beat  us  at  our 
own  game."  Without  going  into  the  cynic's  sweeping 
summary  that  "  man  always  was  and  always  will  be  cor- 
rupt," it  is  but  fair  while  we  are  following  the  trail  of  the 
grafters  to  consider  their  plea  that  the  corrupt  political 
System  they  are  upbuilding  is  founded  on  the  dishonesty 
of  the  American  people.  Is  it? 

It  is  in  Rhode  Island.  The  System  of  Rhode  Island 
which  has  produced  the  man  who  is  at  the  head  of  the 
political  System  of  the  United  States  is  grounded  on  the 
lowest  layer  of  corruption  that  I  have  found  thus  far — 
the  bribery  of  voters  with  cash  at  the  polls.  Other  States 
know  the  practice.  In  Wisconsin,  Missouri,  Illinois,  and 
Pennsylvania  "  workers  "  are  paid  "  to  get  out  the  vote," 
but  this  is  only  preliminary ;  the  direct  and  decisive  pur- 
chase of  power  comes  later,  in  conventions  and  legislatures. 
In  these  States  the  corruptionists  buy  the  people's  repre- 
sentatives. In  Rhode  Island  they  buy  the  people  them- 
selves. 

The  conditions  are  peculiar.  As  the  Rhode  Islanders 
say,  their  State  is  peculiar  in  many  ways.  But  it  is  Amer- 
ican. The  smallest  of  the  States,  it  is  one  of  the  biggest 
in  our  history.  Poor  in  soil,  it  is  rich  in  waterways,  and 
the  Rhode  Islanders,  turning  early  from  agriculture  to 
manufacture,  made  goods  which  they  sent  forth  from  their 
magnificent  harbor  to  all  the  world  in  ships  that  brought 
home  cargoes  of  wealth.  One  of  the  New  England  group 
of  colonies,  Rhode  Island  was  founded  as  a  refuge  from 
the  Puritan  intolerance  of  Massachusetts.  One  of  the 
"  Original  Thirteen  States,"  it  was  the  first  (May  4, 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  123 

1776)  to  declare  its  independence  of  Great  Britain,  and 
the  last  (May  29,  1790)  to  give  allegiance  to  the  United 
States.  So  the  American  spirit  of  commercial  enterprise 
and  political  independence  has  burned  high  in  Rhode 
Island.  There  is  nothing  peculiar  about  that,  and  there  is 
nothing  peculiar  about  the  general  result  of  the  corruption 
of  the  State. 

Rhode  Island  is  an  oligarchy.  But  so  were  Wisconsin 
and  Illinois  and  Missouri,  and  so  are  New  York,  Pennsyl- 
vania, and  New  Jersey.  The  oligarchy  is  the  typical  form 
of  the  actual  government  of  our  States.  There  is  one 
peculiarity  about  the  Rhode  Island  oligarchy,  however. 
It  is  constitutional.  The  oligarchies  of  other  States  were 
grafted  upon  constitutional  democracies.  Rhode  Island 
never  was  a  democracy,  and  in  that  peculiarity  lies  the 
peculiar  significance  of  this  State  to  the  rest  of  us. 

Rhode  Island  has  a  restricted  suffrage.  Many  a  good 
American  thinks  that  if  we  could  "  keep  the  ignorant  for- 
eigner from  voting,"  and  otherwise  limit  the  suffrage  to 
persons  of  property  who  would  have  a  direct,  personal, 
financial  interest  in  government,  we  then  should  have  good 
government.  Should  we?  Rhode  Island  can  answer  that 
question.  Again,  many  "  thinkers  "  have  thought  that  it 
was  the  wicked  cities  with  their  mixed  populations  which 
have  degraded  and  disgraced  us,  and  that  if  we  could  but 
devise  some  scheme  of  representation  by  which  the  balance 
of  power  could  be  given  into  the  honest  hands  of  the  good 
old  American  stock  out  upon  the  healthy  countryside  we 
then  should  be  saved.  Rhode  Island  has  such  a  scheme. 
The  significance  to  the  rest  of  us  of  the  story  of  Rhode 


124     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

Island  lies  in  the  fact  that  its  essentially  typical  condition 
was  reached  under  extraordinary  circumstances,  which 
some  "  leading  citizens  "  in  other  States  think  would  cor- 
rect their  evils. 

"  Leading  citizens  "  have  made  Rhode  Island  what  it  is. 
They  always  have  ruled  there.  I  have  called  the  State  an 
oligarchy.  It  used  to  be  an  aristocracy.  "  Freeholders  " 
and  their  eldest  sons  alone  participated  in  the  colonial 
government  under  the  charter  of  Charles  II.,  and  after  the 
Revolution,  when  all  the  other  States  adopted  constitu- 
tions, Rhode  Island  went  on  under  its  royal  charter  of 
1663  and  an  "  unwritten  constitution  "  till  1842.  I  cannot 
stop  to  describe  this  "  landed  aristocracy  "  in  an  American 
State.  It  is  sufficient  that  it  closed  with  the  Dorr  Rebellion. 
The  abuses  were  so  intolerable  that  the  people,  the  patient 
American  people  who  have  submitted  to  Croker,  Quay, 
Cox,  and  other  despots,  rose  in  open  revolt. 

The  next  experiment  was  a  "  commercial  aristocracy." 
The  constitution  of  1842  "  extended  "  the  suffrage  from 
holders  of  real  to  those  also  possessed  of  personal  property 
— if  they  were  native  born.  The  "  foreign  vote  "  was 
restricted  as  before  to  real  estate  holders  till  1888,  when 
personal  property  qualified  a  foreign-born  as  well  as  a 
native  voter.  The  "  mob,"  which  owned  nothing  and  paid 
no  taxes,  was  allowed  to  vote,  but  only  upon  registering 
four  months  before  election  and  then  not  "  upon  any  prop- 
osition to  impose  a  tax  or  the  expenditure  of  money." 
These  registered  voters,  for  example,  cannot  vote  for  mem- 
bers of  city  councils. 

The  most  effective  restriction  of  the  suffrage,  however, 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  125. 

was  established  in  the  constitutional  scheme  of  dispropor- 
tionate representation.  The  Governor,  elected  by  a  ma- 
jority (now  by  a  plurality)  of  the  voters  of  all  classes, 
was  made  a  "  pure  executive  " ;  he  had  no  veto.  All  legisla- 
tive powers  were  lodged  in  the  General  Assembly  of  two 
houses.  The  lower  branch,  the  House  of  Representatives, 
is  limited  to  seventy-two  members,  no  matter  what  the  pop- 
ulation may  be,  and  while  each  town  shall  have  at  least  one 
representative,  no  city  may  have  more  than  one-sixth  of 
the  membership.  This  is  undemocratic  enough,  but  the 
Senate,  says  the  constitution,  "  shall  consist  of  one  Senator 
from  each  town  and  city  in  the  State." 

Here  is  the  crux  of  the  situation.  A  town  in  Rhode 
Island  is  what  is  known  to  most  of  us  as  a  township.  There 
are  thirty-eight  "  towns  and  cities  "  in  the  State.  Their 
population  in  1900  was  428,551.  Of  this  total,  36,027 
lived  in  twenty  towns.  Thus  less  than  one-eleventh  of  the 
people  of  the  State  elect  more  than  five-tenths — a  majority 
— of  the  Senate.  Providence,  with  29,030  qualified  voters, 
has  one  Senator;  Little  Compton  elected  one,  one  year,  by 
a  unanimous  vote  of  seventy-eight.  There  are  fourteen 
such  "  towns  "  with  less  than  500  qualified  voters ;  there 
are  twenty  with  less  than  2,000  each.  Thus  was  the 
sovereignty  of  the  State  put  into  the  hands  of  the  "  good 
old  American  stock  out  in  the  country." 

What  happened  ?  The  "  best  people  "  continued  to  rule. 
The  "  best  people  "  of  the  period  after  the  new  constitu- 
tion were  manufacturers,  but  their  fine  old  houses  stand 
to-day  as  witnesses  not  only  to  their  wealth,  but  also  to  a 
refined  taste.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  they  came  as 


126     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

near  forming  a  real  aristocracy  as  commercialism  can 
produce.  They  certainly  were  just  the  kind  of  men  that 
many  theorists  say  should  have  control  of  government. 
Well,  they  got  control  in  Rhode  Island.  How?  With 
money.  Aristocrats  though  they  were,  they  were  business 
men  first,  and  they  went  after  the  key  to  control  in  a  busi- 
nesslike way.  They  bought  up  the  towns.  The  "  best 
people  "  sent  offers  of  bribes  to  the  good  people  of  the 
countryside,  and  the  good  people  took  the  bribes  and  let 
the  best  people  run  the  government.  It  was  a  commercial 
aristocracy  that  corrupted  the  American  stock  in  Rhode 
Island  and  laid  the  foundation  of  the  present  financial  and 
political  System  of  corruption  in  the  State. 

This  class  ruled  till  well  down  into  the  eighties,  and  its 
leader,  Senator  Henry  B.  Anthony,  "  discovered "  and 
promoted  Nelson  W.  Aldrich,  his  successor,  who  represents 
the  System,  and  General  Charles  R.  Brayton,  the  boss  who 
developed  and  directs  it.  Since  Anthony's  time,  the  latter- 
day  business  man — he  who  makes,  not  cotton  goods,  but 
money — the  captain  of  finance,  has  succeeded  to  the  con- 
trol, but  he  has  not  disturbed  the  foundation  stone  of  the 
System.  He  also  rules  with  money.  He,  too,  sends  bribes  to 
the  towns  of  Rhode  Island,  and  to  him  also  the  good  "  coun- 
try "  American  has  surrendered  his  sovereignty.  There  is 
no  doubt  about  this.  The  corruption  of  the  voters  of  the 
towns  of  Rhode  Island  is  so  ancient  and  so  common  that 
Governor  Lucius  F.  C.  Garvin  addressed  in  March,  1903, 
a  "  Special  Message  concerning  Bribery  in  Elections  to 
the  Honorable,  the  General  Assembly,"  etc. : 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  127 

GENTLEMEN: —  .  .  .  That  bribery  exists  to  a  great  ex- 
tent in  the  elections  of  this  State  is  a  matter  of  common 
knowledge.  No  general  election  passes  without,  in  some 
sections  of  the  State,  the  purchase  of  votes  by  one  or  both 
of  the  great  political  parties.  It  is  true  that  the  results  of  the 
election  may  not  often  be  changed,  so  far  as  the  candidates 
on  the  State  ticket  are  concerned,  but  many  Assemblymen 
occupy  the  seats  they  do  by  means  of  purchased  votes. 

In  a  considerable  number  of  our  towns  bribery  is  so  com- 
mon and  has  existed  for  so  many  years  that  the  awful  nature 
of  the  crime  has  ceased  to  impress.  In  some  towns  the  bribery 
takes  place  openly;  is  not  called  bribery,  nor  considered  a 
serious  matter.  The  money  paid  to  the  voter,  whether  two, 
five,  or  twenty  dollars,  is  spoken  of  as  "  payment  for  his 
time."  The  claim  that  the  money  given  to  the  elector  is  not 
for  the  purpose  of  influencing  his  vote,  but  is  compensation 
for  time  lost  in  visiting  the  polls,  is  the  merest  sophistry,  and 
should  not  deceive  any  adult  citizen  of  ordinary  intelligence. 
It  is  well  known  that  in  such  towns,  when  one  political  party 
is  supplied  with  a  corruption  fund  and  the  other  is  without, 
the  party  so  provided  invariably  elects  its  Assembly  ticket, 
thus  affording  positive  proof  that  the  votes  are  bought  and 
the  voters  bribed.  .  . 

This  startling  official  arraignment  had  no  appreciable 
effect  within  the  State.  It  was  too  true.  But  the  message 
attracted  outside  attention,  and  Mr.  Edward  Lowry,  of 
the  New  York  Evening  Post,  and  Mr.  Waldo  L.  Cook,  of 
the  Springfield  (Mass.)  Republican,  made  investigations 
so  thorough  and  reports  so  complete  that,  though  I  went 
over  the  same  ground  with  more  time  and  more  deliberation, 


128     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

I  found  nothing  to  correct  and  little  to  add  to  their 
facts. 

Nine  of  the  towns  are  absolutely  purchasable ;  that  is  to 
say,  they  "  go  the  way  the  money  goes."  Eleven  more  can 
be  influenced  by  the  use  of  money.  Many  of  their  voters 
won't  go  to  the  polls  at  all  unless  "  there  is  something  in 
it."  But  there  need  not  be  much  in  it.  Governor  Garvin 
quoted  a  political  leader  in  one  town  who  declared  that 
if  neither  party  had  money,  but  one  had  a  box  of  cigars, 
"  my  town  would  go  for  that  party — if  the  workers 
would  give  up  the  cigars."  In  another  town  one  party 
had  but  one  man  in  it  who  did  not  take  money,  and  he 
never  voted.  A  campaign  marching  club  organized  for 
a  presidential  campaign  paraded  every  night  with  en- 
thusiasm so  great  that  the  leaders  thought  it  would  be 
unnecessary  to  pay  for  votes  in  this  town ;  few  of  the  mem- 
bers voted.  Another  time,  when  no  money  turned  up  at  a 
State  election,  one  town,  by  way  of  rebuke  to  the  regular 
party  managers,  elected  a  Prohibition  candidate  to  the 
Assembly. 

Both  parties  buy  votes,  and  though  the  practice  seems 
to  have  destroyed  completely  all  loyalty  to  the  State,  some 
loyalty  to  party  remains  in  most  of  these  towns.  But  even 
this  sentiment  is  mercenary.  The  Democratic  leader  of  a 
Democratic  town  told  me  that  he  has  to  pay  something 
always.  "  For  instance,"  he  explained,  "  my  town  is  all 
right.  The  Republicans  can  come  in  there  with  more  money 
than  I  have,  and  I  still  can  hold  it.  Suppose  they  have 
enough  to  pay  ten  dollars  a  vote  and  I  can  give  but  three ; 
I  tell  my  fellows  to  go  over  and  get  the  ten,  then  come  to 


A   CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  129 

me  and  get  my  three ;  that  makes  thirteen,  but  I  tell  them 
to  vote  my  way.  And  they  do.  And  the  Republicans  do 
the  same  in  their  solid  towns  when  we  go  in  to  outbid 
them."  Another  instance  stated  to  me  by  a  campaign 
manager  was  the  experience  of  a  "  respectable  business 
man  "  who  lived  in  a  town  that  usually  "  went  wrong." 
The  manager  wanted  to  carry  that  town,  and  he  asked 
the  business  man  to  do  it.  "  I  offered  him  a  few  hundred 
dollars,"  he  said,  "  and  he  wouldn't  take  the  money  at 
first;  said  it  would  be  of  no  use  among  the  kind  of  men 
he  could  influence.  But  I  got  him  to  try  it,  and  after 
election  when  he  came  to  report  he  had  learned  something. 
He  had  spent  most  of  the  money,  and  he  was  astonished 
at  the  character  of  the  men  who  took  such  money.  *  Why,' 
he  said,  *  they  took  it  as  easy  as  you  please.'  They  asked 
why  we  hadn't  done  that  before.  They  said  they  were  will- 
ing to  vote  our  way  if  only  we  would  make  it  inter- 
esting ! " 

This  "  respectable  business  man  "  discovered  the  most 
depressing  development  of  the  Rhode  Island  practices — 
the  kind  of  voters  that  take  bribes.  They  are  Americans ; 
others,  too,  but  the  worst  of  these  rotten  boroughs  are 
the  "  hill  towns,"  so  called  because  they  lie  back  away  from 
the  harbor  and  river  and  "  big  cities,"  up  on  the  hills. 
There  is  the  American  stock  pure;  too  pure,  some  apolo- 
gists say;  the  hill  towns  are  called  degenerate.  Maybe 
they  are.  The  population  of  many  of  them  has  decreased 
slowly,  but  pretty  steadily,  for  a  hundred  years.  "  The 
most  courageous  of  the  people  have  gone  out,"  you  hear, 
"  and  little  new  blood  has  gone  in."  But  that  only  proves 


130     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

the  point.  These  pure  Americans  are  corrupt.  Another 
consideration  to  be  weighed  is  that  the  temptation  has  been 
severe  and  long.  With  so  much  power  to  bestow,  their 
votes  have  been  eagerly  sought,  as  very  valuable.  But 
this  accident  only  explains,  perhaps,  why  other,  more 
populous,  districts  elsewhere  are  not  corrupt;  they  have 
not  been  tried.  It  is  cheaper  in  Providence  to  bribe  the 
opposition  leaders,  and  in  Missouri  and  Wisconsin  to  wait 
and  buy  the  select  men  of  the  people,  not  the  people. 
Where  the  people  are  tempted,  in  the  country  "  towns  " 
of  Rhode  Island,  the  people  sell  out. 

And  Rhode  Island  proves  the  willingness  to  buy.  The 
respectable  business  man,  who  was  astonished  at  the  stand- 
ing of  the  men  who  sold,  was  ready  enough  to  buy,  and  he 
did  buy,  and  he  had  no  astonishment  for  his  own  conduct. 
Bribe-giving  is  "  not  so  bad."  Some  men  who  talked  to  me 
of  their  vote-buying  knew  and  said,  and  one  of  them 
plainly  felt,  that  it  was  a  shameful  practice,  but  they  all 
regarded  it  as  necessary.  Governor  Garvin  referred  once 
publicly  to  a  "  district  judge  "  who  so  regarded  it,  and 
so  notorious  is  this  case  that  a  dozen  men  named  the  judge 
to  me.  The  Democrats,  who,  being  out  of  power,  stand  for 
reform  and  a  new  constitution,  do  not  see  how  they  can 
get  control  long  enough  to  make  the  needed  changes  with- 
out more  money  than  they  can  raise  in  the  State,  and  the 
hope  of  some  of  the  leaders  is  that  an  exigency  will  arise, 
say  in  national  politics,  which  will  enable  them  to  collect 
enough  "  outside  capital "  to  buy  up  the  State  for  their 
party. 

Bribery,  bribery  of  the  people,  is  a  custom  of  the  coun- 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  131 

try  in  Rhode  Island;  it  is  an  institution,  and,  like  the 
church  or  property,  it  is  not  safe  to  attack  it.  This  may 
sound  preposterous,  and  there  is  a  public  opinion  against 
the  custom,  but  the  country  clergy,  as  Mr.  Lowry  showed 
and  as  Bishop  McVickar  of  the  Rhode  Island  diocese  of 
the  Episcopal  Church  confirmed,  do  not  denounce  bribery 
from  their  pulpits ;  they  do  not  dare.  The  Bishop  declared 
that  the  country  clergy  could  not  "  speak  out  without 
coming  to  financial  grief  and  ruin,"  and  he  proposed 
"  doing  something,  so  that  no  one  will  dare  threaten  local 
ministers  with  the  loss  of  their  positions."  What  does  the 
Bishop  mean  by  such  language?  "  It  is  an  outrage  on  our 
civilization,"  he  added,  "  that  young  men  of  the  church 
with  high  ideals  should  be  put  under  the  ban  of  the  power 
of  political  immoralities  and  forced  to  acquiesce  in  evil 
for  the  sake  of  their  families." 

The  good  Bishop  was  pointing,  when  he  spoke  thus,  at 
the  System,  of  which  this  bribery  institution  is  the  corner- 
stone. Back  of  the  vote-buyers  are  the  most  powerful 
interests  of  the  State,  the  friends  of  "  all  that  is,"  and 
even  Bishop  McVickar  has  been  unable  to  do  the  "  some- 
thing "  to  free  the  clergy.  The  head  men  in  the  churches, 
the  leading  citizens  in  th«  State,  the  captains  of  finance 
and  industry,  won't  let  the  clergy  "  preach  politics  " ;  they 
may  preach  the  Gospel,  not  morality,  not  practical 
morality. 

What  is  this  precious  System  that  can  compel  the  re- 
spect, of  silence  at  least,  even  from  the  Church?  It  is  just 
such  a  typical  financial  political  organization  as  we  have 
seen  in  other  States,  only  plainer ;  as  General  Brayton,  the 


132     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

boss,  says :  "  Bad,  but  not  a  bit  worse  than  in  many  other 
States.  Because  Rhode  Island  is  small,  you  can  see  things 
better;  that's  what  makes  the  difference."  But  that  is  a 
most  encouraging  difference  to  those  who  want  to  see 
things  better.  Business  men  are  back  of  the  politicians 
that  rule  most  corrupt  States ;  in  Rhode  Island  they  are  in 
plain  sight,  and  everybody  knows  them  and  their  opera- 
tions. Here,  also,  there  are  politicians  to  "  do  the  dirty 
work,"  but  the  very  politicians  in  this  State  are  not  of  the 
"  low-down  "  sort.  They  are  not  "  Irish  immigrants  " ; 
the  Irish  are  in  opposition  here.  Nor  are  they  saloon- 
keepers and  keepers  of  disorderly  houses,  gamblers,  and 
the  "  scum  of  the  earth."  So  purely  a  business  govern- 
ment is  this  that  the  officers  and  legislators,  the  bosses  and 
the  leaders,  are  typically  native-born  citizens  of  profes- 
sional and  business  occupations.  General  Brayton  himself 
comes  of  a  fine  old  Rhode  Island  family,  with  a  revolu- 
tionary record  and  a  line  of  sons  reaching  from  the 
Supreme  Court  bench  to  Congress ;  the  boss  went  to  Brown 
University  and  served  with  credit  in  the  Civil  War.  Though 
he  had  himself  admitted  to  the  bar  apparently  only  to 
enable  him,  as  a  St.  Louis  grafter  put  it,  "  to  take  fees, 
not  bribes,"  none  the  less  the  boss  is  a  lawyer. 

And  he  is  a  "  character."  He  is  old  now,  blind,  and 
some  of  his  political  friends  said  he  was  mentally  weak- 
ened. I  think  they  feared  his  candor;  though,  when  I 
called,  his  relatives,  after  consulting  with  him,  and  report- 
ing that  he  felt  he  had  better  not  talk,  they  put  the  refusal 
on  other  grounds.  It  is  better  so,  for  whereas  I  make  it  a 
rule  to  treat  such  interviews  as  confidential,  Mr.  Lowry  had 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  133 

his  for  publication,  and  here  it  is,  a  remarkable  outline  of 
the  Rhode  Island  government  by  General  Brayton  himself : 

"  There  is  a  lot  of  talk  of  bribery  here,  but  ...  I 
don't  think  there  is  much  outright  vote-buying  done;  the 
voters  are  paid  for  their  time,  because  they  have  to  leave 
their  work  and  come  down  to  the  polls.  Sometimes  that 
takes  all  day.  The  Republican  party  shouldn't  be  blamed 
for  the  present  state  of  affairs.  The  Democrats  are  just 
as  bad,  or  would  be  if  they  had  the  money. 

"  The  manufacturers  in  the  State  are  really  to  blame  for 
present  conditions.  If  they  would  only  hang  together  and 
wanted  to  do  it,  they  could  clean  out  the  State  in  no  time 
at  all.  They  give  to  the  Republican  campaign  fund  in 
Presidential  years,  but  usually  when  you  go  to  them  to 
get  money  for  State  elections  they  say :  '  Oh !  we'll  take 
care  of  our  town ' ;  so  in  that  way  all  of  the  towns  in  the 
State  are  peddled  around,  each  manufacturer  caring  for 
his  own  town.  Some  of  them  haven't  treated  the  party  just 
right.  The  Republicans  have  never  passed  any  legislation 
that  would  bother  them,  like  the  ten-hour  law  and  things 
like  that,  until  there  was  such  a  strong  demand  from 
the  labor  people  and  the  citizens  that  the  party  had  to 
do  it." 

"  What  is  your  share  in  the  forming  of  legislation  and 
the  passage  of  bills?  " 

"  I  am  an  attorney  for  certain  clients  and  look  out  for 
their  interests  before  the  Legislature.  I  am  retained  annu- 
ally by  the  New  York,  New  Haven  and  Hartford  Railroad 
Company,  and  am  usually  spoken  of  as  '  of  counsel '  for 
that  road.  Of  course,  I  don't  have  anything  to  do  with 


134     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

damage  suits  or  matters  in  relation  to  grade  crossing.  As 
everyone  knows,  I  act  for  the  Rhode  Island  Company 
(street-railway  interests),  and  I  have  been  retained  in  cer- 
tain cases  by  the  Providence  Telephone  Company.  In 
addition  to  these  I  have  had  connections,  not  permanent, 
with  various  companies  desiring  franchises,  charters,  and 
things  of  that  sort  from  the  Legislature.  I  never  solicit 
any  business,"  added  General  Brayton,  without  a  smile. 
"  It  all  comes  to  me  unsought,  and  if  I  can  handle  it  I 
accept  the  retainer." 

"  What  is  your  power  in  the  Legislature  that  enables 
you  to  serve  your  clients  ?  " 

"  Well,  you  see,  in  managing  the  campaign  every  year 
I  am  in  a  position  to  be  of  service  to  men  all  over  the  State. 
I  help  them  to  get  elected,  and,  naturally,  many  warm 
friendships  result,  then  when  they  are  in  a  position  to 
repay  me  they  are  glad  to  do  it." 

The  elected  Governors  of  Rhode  Island  are  called  "  ad- 
ministrative mummies."  They  have  sat  for  years  without 
power  and  without  homage  in  the  State  House,  while  across 
the  hall,  in  the  office  of  the  High  Sheriff,  Boss  Brayton 
was  the  State.  He  directed  the  General  Assembly.  His 
word  was  law.  He  did  not  have  to  "  dicker,  trade,  and 
buy,"  there  was  no  "  addition,  division,  and  silence  "  for 
him.  He  handled  the  campaign  funds  of  "  the  party," 
and  with  them  the  voters  were  bought  at  the  polls.  The 
legislator  returned  by  the  electors  came  bought.  When 
the  time  for  local  caucuses  was  approaching,  the  party 
leaders  came  down  to  Providence  to  get  money  for  ex- 
penses from  Brayton. 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  135 

"  How  much  do  you  think  you  will  need?  "  he  would 
ask. 

"  Oh,  say  $500." 

'*  Five  hundred  dollars  to  carry  that  town !  Who's  your 
man  for  Senator?  " 

The  leader  would  tell  him.  If  the  local  candidate  suited 
Brayton,  a  bargain  was  struck  as  to  the  amount;  if  not, 
he  would  say  pointedly :  "  I  guess  there  isn't  any  money 
for  you  this  year." 

The  leader  then  had  to  go  back  and  pick  out  another 
candidate,  or,  perhaps,  Brayton  would  give  him  a  sugges- 
tion which  the  "  other  fellows  "  would  have  to  "  agree 
upon."  'At  any  rate,  Brayton  had  to  be  satisfied  or  the 
party  got  no  money  for  expenses. 

When  the  General  Assembly  met  he  directed  its  labors, 
and  his  masterfulness  is  unprecedented.  A  good-natured, 
generous  man,  he  adopted  a  cross,  surly  tone,  which,  alter- 
nating with  kindness,  made  men  fear  and  like  him,  too. 
Not  at  all  vindictive,  he  punished  severely  as  a  matter  of 
policy.  If  a  member  of  the  Legislature  disobeyed  him,  he 
would  say,  "  That  man  shan't  come  back,"  and  that  man 
rarely  could  be  renominated  and  reflected.  He  was  very 
open,  and  hundreds  of  anecdotes  are  told  to  illustrate  his 
methods. 

The  Springfield  Republican  reported  two,  which  are 
well  known.  Once,  when  the  House  of  Representatives  was 

in  prolonged  session,  Brayton  became  hungry.  *'  D 

it !  "  he  exclaimed,  "  who  is  that  fool  talking  in  the  House? 
It's  lunch  time  and  past.  Sheriff,  go  in  and  see  that  the 
House  adjourns."  The  House  adjourned.  Another  time, 


136     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

this  conversation  was  overheard  between  the  angry  boss 
and  a  most  humble  Republican  floor  leader : 

"  D it,  can't  I  have  a  little  bill  passed  when  I  want 

it?  "  said  the  boss. 

"  But,  General,  I  didn't  know  you  were  interested  in 
that  bill." 

"  Well,  I  am,  and  I  want  it  passed  right  away." 

That  little  bill  was  passed  right  away. 

"  Where's  Senator ?  "  said  the  boss  in  his  blindness 

one  morning  when  he  arrived  in  the  State  House. 

"  In  the  Senate,"  said  someone. 

"  Get  him,"  said  Brayton.  "  Bring  him  here.  I  want 
him  to  lead  me  out  to  [let  us  say]  drink." 

Such  was  the  discipline  of  a  coarse  man  made  peevish 
by  too  much  power.  The  only  wonder  is  that  men  put  up 
with  it.  But  Brayton  could  reward,  too.  He  had  "  suc- 
cess "  as  well  as  "  failure  "  to  bestow.  The  General  As- 
sembly "  elects  "  judges,  sheriffs,  and  fills  most  of  the 
offices  in  between.  It  is  the  road  to  success,  and  Brayton 
has  made  it  a  rule  to  send  on  to  these  higher  offices,  even  to 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  State,  men  who  have  served  him 
in  the  General  Assembly,  thus  controlled  and  thus  disci- 
plined. The  law  allows  legislators  to  serve  as  district 
judges  while  sitting  in  the  Legislature,  and  they  do.  The 
effect  on  the  courts  of  all  this  is  not  for  me  to  discuss 
(it  is  said  to  be  "  not  so  bad  as  you  would  think  ").  The 
effect  on  the  Legislature  is  to  make  it  absolutely  subserv- 
ient to  the  boss,  who  really  appoints  to  all  these  offices, 
and  thus  controls  all  the  patronage  of  the  State.  More 
than  that,  he  has  business  to  give — business  that  is  not 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  137 

political.  It  puzzled  me  at  first  to  find  that  there  was  so 
little  bribery  in  a  Legislature  so  corruptly  devised.  The 
pay  of  Senators  and  Representatives  was  small,  and  some 
of  them  served  for  years  without  the  reward  of  promotion 
to  the  bench  or  any  other  office.  The  chairman  of  a  most 
important  committee  explained  it  all  frankly  to  me.  There 
was  some  bribery,  he  said,  but  it  wasn't  typical.  When 
he  first  opened  his  law  office,  a  small  corporation  offered 
him  $5,000,  besides  his  fee,  if  he  could  put  through  the 
Legislature  an  amendment  to  their  charter.  William  G. 
Roelker,  the  Senator  at  the  head  of  the  committee  that 
would  decide,  said  it  should  not  pass.  The  young  lawyer 
did  not  know  Brayton,  but  he  went  to  him  and  told  him 
all  about  his  business. 

"I  told  Brayton,"  he  said,  "just  how  it  was;  that  I 
wanted  that  $5,000,  and  after  talking  a  long  time  to  me, 
the  General  said  he'd  see  about  it ;  for  me  to  come  the 
next  day.  I  went  at  the  appointed  time  and  Brayton  was 
out.  I  was  *  hot,5  till  a  friend  of  mine  came  up  and  said 
my  bill  was  through.  Brayton  had  done  it  before  he  said 
he  would,  and  when  I  offered  to  divide  the  five  thousand 
with  him,  he  nearly  threw  me  out  of  his  office.  But  he 
threw  me  into  politics  all  right.  He  knew  he  was  putting 
me  under  obligations  forever ;  oh,  he  was  shrewd  all  right. 
But  wouldn't  you  go  the  limit  for  a  man  that  gave  you 
your  first  lift  like  that?  " 

I  have  heard  thoughtful  Rhode  Islanders  say  that  by 
such  methods,  by  a  cynical  tone  with  young  men  and 
sneers  at  their  college  education  and  high  ideals,  by 
assisting  them  in  "  crooked  business  "  and  getting  his 


138     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

corporations  to  employ  the  "  good  fellows  "  and  ignore 
the  "  fools,"  General  Brayton  has  corrupted  more  of  the 
youth  of  the  State  than  any  man  that  ever  lived  in  it — 
Brayton  and  his  business  backers — the  men  and  interests 
he  says  he  represents. 

For  Brayton  was  the  front,  not  the  head,  of  the  Sys- 
tem. Say  what  you  will  about  the  "  boss,"  no  one  man 
can  do  what  any  American  boss  has  done  without  the 
powerful  backing  of  the  "  vested  interests  "  of  a  com- 
munity. Brayton  had  great  personal  power ;  he  "  organ- 
ized "  the  Republican  party ;  he  systematized  the  corrup- 
tion of  voters ;  he  chose  legislators ;  he  organized  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly  and  ran  it;  he  has  gradually  altered  the 
government  of  the  State.  But  he  did  not  do  this  for  his 
own  uses.  Brayton  is  not  rich.  He  says  himself  that  he 
took  "  fees  "  for  legislation,  but  they  were  fees,  not  for- 
tunes. The  New  Haven  Railroad's  annual  retainer  was 
only  $10,000.  His  fee  for  an  ordinary  bill  was  $500.  I 
know  of  one  company  that  paid  him  as  high  as  $1,000, 
but  that  was  for  a  piece  of  legislation  worth,  in  Missouri, 
for  instance,  at  least  $25,000.  Like  the  voters  of  Rhode 
Island,  like  the  local  leaders,  like  the  legislators,  the  boss 
of  Rhode  Island  was  cheap.  "  I  often  told  him  that," 
said  one  of  his  lieutenants  to  me  when  I  had  expressed  this 
opinion,  "  and  now  that  he  is  getting  out,  we'll  raise  some 
prices."  Brayton  was  a  bad  and  an  able  man,  but  he 
was  a  tool,  and  he  realizes  it  now :  "  I  have  been  the  scape- 
goat of  the  party  for  twenty  years." 

Who  are  "  the  party  "  in  Rhode  Island  ?  As  I  have  said 
above,  they  are  and  they  always  have  been  the  "  leading 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  139 

business  men  "  of  the  State.  First  the  old  aristocracy, 
then  the  old  manufacturers,  and  Brayton's  growl  because 
they  would  not  let  him  spend  their  bribery  funds  in  their 
own  towns  is  an  echo  of  a  past  relationship.  Then  came 
the  railroads,  and  the  annual  retainer  of  $10,000  is  what 
the  scientists  would  call  a  rudimentary  vestige  of  their 
interest.  After  steam  comes  electricity,  and  it  is  the  elec- 
tric railway  men  who  are  at  the  head  of  the  government 
now.  For,  as  General  Brayton  explained  to  Mr.  Lowry, 
he  serves  others  with  "  the  understanding  that  when  their 
interests  conflict  with  those  of  the  Rhode  Island  (street- 
railway)  Company,  the  street-railway  people  are  to  have 
first  call."  So  the  Brayton  government  is  a  business  gov- 
ernment. The  cost  to  the  character  of  the  people  of  the 
State  is  heavy,  but  never  mind;  Rhode  Island  has  what 
honest  business  men  of  this  country  have  long  honestly 
said  we  ought  to  have  in  all  States  and  all  cities  in  the 
United  States,  a  business  government — of  the  business 
men,  by  the  business  men,  and  for  the  business  men.  What 
have  the  Rhode  Island  business  men  done  with  it? 

The  old  aristocracy,  we  have  seen,  drove  the  people  to 
revolt.  The  old  manufacturers  sought  a  high  protective 
tariff,  and  they  got  it.  The  railroads  sought  rights,  privi- 
leges, and  property,  and  they  got  them  in  the  way  they 
preferred,  by  bribery,  not  by  a  fair  contract  with  the 
State.  This  is  what  Rhode  Island's  older  business  rulers 
did  with  political  power.  Now  for  the  "  trolley  crowd"; 
what  have  they  done  with  it? 

They  financed  it.  They  organized  it  into  a  company 
which  they  are  selling  to  outside  capitalists. 


140     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

"  They  "  are  Marsden  J.  Perry,  William  G.  Roelker, 
and  the  Hon.  Nelson  W.  Aldrich.  Perry  is  the  business 
man.  He  began  life  a  poor  boy,  had  some  sort  of  connec- 
tion with  a  theatrical  show,  till,  entering  the  chattel  mort- 
gage business,  he  made  himself  a  banker,  promoter,  and 
finally  Rhode  Island's  first  captain  of  finance.  He  is 
really  an  able  man,  dangerous,  but  only  because  he  is 
spoiled  by  power.  Roelker  is  the  lawyer.  Counsel  to  cor- 
porations, he  was  after  money,  and  when  they  all  got  that 
he  retired  to  play  at  Newport.  Aldrich  is  the  politician  of 
the  group.  He  also  began  life  humbly,  as  a  clerk  and 
bookkeeper,  first  in  a  market,  then  in  a  wholesale  gro- 
cery business,  and  in  this  he  worked  up  to  a  partner- 
ship. Thus  he  was  a  business  man  originally — he  is  yet, 
for  that  matter — but  business  men  in  Rhode  Island  do  not 
neglect  politics,  and  Aldrich  became  alderman,  legislator, 
Speaker  of  the  House,  Congressman,  and,  finally,  Senator. 
Having  served  it  step  by  step,  this  leader  of  the  United 
States  Senate  may  truly  be  said  to  be  a  product,  as  he 
is  now  the  supreme  head,  of  the  Rhode  Island  System. 

There  were  others  concerned  with  these  three  men,  but 
they,  representing  the  business,  the  law,  and  the  politics 
of  the  State,  conceived  and  carried  to  success  a  scheme 
to  buy  up,  equip  with  electricity,  and  not  only  run,  but 
finance,  the  old  horse-car  lines  of  Providence,  Pawtucket, 
and,  later,  of  the  State.  The  first  steps  were  taken  in 
secret,  but  I  understand  that  the  plan  originated  with 
Perry.  He  was  getting  interested  in  public  utilities  and 
had  put  a  lighting  deal  through  the  (business  men's)  city 
council  of  Providence.  While  he  was  thus  in  touch  both 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  141 

with  finance  and  politics,  he  had  neither  the  capital,  credit, 
nor  political  power  needed  for  such  a  scheme  as  this. 
You  don't  have  to  have  money  for  big  as  you  do  for  small 
business ;  influence  will  do,  financial  and  political  "  pull.'* 
Aldrich  had  both.  As  the  highest  representative  of  polit- 
ical power  in  the  State,  its  senior  Senator  should  have  been 
the  man  most  to  be  avoided  and  feared.  His  duty,  if  he 
took  any  part  at  all,  was  to  see  that  the  interests  of  the 
State  were  protected.  But  that  is  a  moral,  not  a  practical, 
view  to  take  of  business  and  politics.  Aldrich,  as  the  Sen- 
ator for  Rhode  Island,  had  gone  to  Congress  as  the 
representative  of  protected,  that  is  to  say,  privileged, 
business.  Indeed,  it  was  as  the  representative  of  manufac- 
turers of  his  State  that  he  felt  bound  to  make  himself  an 
authority  on  tariff  legislation.  And  it  was  as  such  that  the 
chairman  of  the  Senate  Finance  Committee  came  in  touch 
with  Wall  Street,  the  trusts,  and  the  so-called  moneyed 
interests.  It  was  natural  for  a  Rhode  Islander  to  think  of 
him  for  such  business  as  Perry  had  before  him.  And 
Aldrich  joined  Perry;  he  became  a  partner  in  his  scheme; 
he  delivered  Brayton  and  Brayton's  System;  and,  besides 
the  actual  government  of  his  State,  Senator  Aldrich 
brought  to  back  the  scheme  capital  from  out  of  the  State. 
One  of  the  explicit  charges  against  Senator  Aldrich 
was  offered  as  an  explanation  of  the  scandalous  campaign 
to  elect  about  this  time  (1892)  a  Legislature  to  return  him 
to  the  United  States  Senate.  It  was  repeatedly  made  by 
Colonel  A.  K.  McClure,  the  editor  of  the  Philadelphia 
Times,  and  never  denied  by  Mr.  Aldrich,  who,  however, 
says  he  never  denies  such  things.  Colonel  McClure  de- 


142     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

clared  that  Aldrich,  as  chairman  of  the  Finance  Committee 
of  the  Senate,  added  to  the  House  tariff  schedules  one  mill 
— worth  $3,000,000  a  year  to  the  Trust — to  the  duty  on 
Sugar.  "  When  this  bill  came  to  the  Senate,"  said  Colonel 
McClure  in  his  Boston  speech,  "  there  was  no  open  demand 
for  an  increase,  but  Senator  Aldrich  had  a  battle  in  Rhode 
Island,,  and  it  was  a  battle  royal  for  cash.  He  had  to  be 
reflected  to  the  Senate,  and  he  gave  an  additional  one- 
tenth  of  one  per  cent,  to  the  sugar  men,  and  the  sugar 
men  fought  that  battle  in  Rhode  Island  and  reflected 
him." 

Just  as  Providence  people  were  wondering  where  the 
money  for  that  campaign  came  from,  so  they  wondered 
who  the  men  were  in  the  railway  deal  and  where  that 
money  came  from.  The  street-car  stock  was  bought  up 
at  advancing  prices,  and  Brayton's  Legislature  was  turn- 
ing out  bills  to  enable  willing  councils  to  grant  franchises. 
Evidently  they  were  powerful  men,  but  all  was  a  mystery 
till  in  1893  the  United  Traction  and  Electric  Company 
was  organized.  Then  Senator  Aldrich  appeared  as  presi- 
dent; John  E.  Searles  (sugar)  as  vice-president;  F.  P. 
Olcott  (Central  Trust  Company),  treasurer;  and  Perry 
and  Roelker  as  officers,  directors,  or  stockholders  in  the 
subordinate  companies ;  and  the  money  proved  to  have 
been  loaned  by  what  is  known  in  New  York  as  the  (Cen- 
tral) "  trust  company  of  the  sugar  crowd."  The  pro- 
moters issued  $8,000,000  of  bonds  to  pay  for  the  property 
they  bought  and  to  equip  it  with  electricity,  and  $8,000,000 
of  stock,  which  they  divided  among  themselves,  they  and 
their  outside  backers,  eight  in  all. 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  143 

But  they  were  not  yet  through.  Considering  their  inex- 
perience in  such  business,  Aldrich,  Perry  &  Co.  displayed 
unusual  foresight.  The  scheme,  still  to  be  executed,  was 
to  gather  practically  all  the  public  utility  companies  in 
and  around  Providence  into  one  great  parcel,  "  The  Rhode 
Island  Company,"  and,  way  back  in  1891,  their  first  legis- 
lation was  a  general  act  providing  that  any  town  or  city 
might  grant  exclusive  franchises.  In  1892  the  General 
Assembly  passed  special  acts  for  such  exclusive  franchises 
to  the  street-railway,  gas,  and  electric  light  companies. 
These  franchises  were  to  be  for  twenty  years ;  they  might 
just  as  well  have  had  them  for  ninety-nine  years,  but  it  is 
amazing  to  see  how  often  these  public  utility  political 
business  men  all  over  the  country  have  been  satisfied  with 
short-term  grants.  Apparently  they  thought  only  of  a 
quick  turn  for  cash.  Perry,  Aldrich  &  Co.  made  this  mis- 
take. It  is  said  that  they  discovered  it  when  they  began 
to  approach  Philadelphia  capital  to  sell  out.  Down  there 
the  captains  of  political  industry  had  grants  for  999 
years,  and  they  pointed  out  the  defect  in  the  Rhode  Island 
charters.  By  that  time  it  was  almost  too  late. 

Opposition  was  developing  to  this  abuse  of  the  powers 
of  the  State  for  private  exploitation.  The  public,  espe- 
cially in  Providence,  began  to  ask  questions  and  make 
demands.  These  demands  were  very  moderate,  and  they 
seem  finally  to  have  resolved  themselves  into  one — for  a 
transfer  system.  Now,  any  expert  street-railway  man 
knows  that  transfer  tickets  wisely  given  increase  traffic 
and  profits,  but  President  Aldrich  was  not  such  an  expert. 
He  was  a  "  power  behind  a  power,"  and  he  declared  that 


STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

the  company  could  not  pay  interest  on  the  bonds  and 
dividends  on  its  (watered)  stock  if  the  transfer  privilege 
were  granted.  The  absurd  public  continued,  none  the  less, 
to  regard  this  private  business  as  a  public  convenience, 
and  the  cry  was  still  for  transfers.  The  company,  which 
had  got  so  much  for  little  or  nothing  (a  graduated  tax 
of  from  three  to  five  per  cent,  of  the  gross  receipts),  see- 
ing that  it  might  have  to  yield,  looked  about  for  something 
to  get  out  of  the  public  for  the  transfer  privilege.  Why 
not  an  extension  of  its  twenty-year  franchise?  A  bill  was 
put  through  the  ever-ready  General  Assembly  providing 
that  a  new  contract,  for  transfers,  etc.,  might  be  entered 
into  by  the  companies  and  the  City  of  Providence  "  for 
a  term  of  not  more  than  twenty-five  years  from  the  date 
of  such  contracts."  Thus  was  the  franchise  to  be  ex- 
tended. The  trick  was  seen,  and  the  public,  having  no 
effective  representation  in  any  branch  of  the  government, 
resorted  to  mass  meetings  to  prevent  the  city  council  from 
entering  into  the  new  agreement.  The  city  council,  com- 
posed, mind  you,  of  business  men,  not  of  typical  aldermen, 
and  elected  by  a  restricted  suffrage,  was  a  part  of  the 
State  System;  it  had  been  put  up  to  ask  for  this  bill;  it 
had  asked  for  it ;  and  now  failed  to  clinch  the  bargain  only 
through  fear  of  the  extra-legal  expression  of  the  public  will. 
The  next  scheme  appeared  in  an  act  (General  Assembly, 
1896)  which  provided  for  transfers  at  certain  valuable 
central  sites,  which  the  city  was  to  give  to  the  company. 
This  was  no  more  preposterous  than  giving  away  miles  of 
streets,  but  the  public,  again  by  sheer  indignation,  beat 
its  own  government.  The  transfer  controversy  went  on 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  145 

for  years,  till  1902,  and  then  the  Legislature  required  the 
company  to  give  transfers,  but  only  so  long  as  five-cent 
fares  were  paid.  The  agitation  for  three-cent  fares  had 
arisen  in  other  places,  and  the  Rhode  Island  Company, 
under  the  guise  of  giving  "  free  transfers,"  fixed  the 
fare  at  a  nickel  forever.  That  was  the  purpose  of  the  act. 
And  the  effect  of  the  "  free  transfers  "  was  a  sudden  up- 
ward leap  of  earnings ! 

Meanwhile  the  company  had  been  extending  its  lines, 
procuring  franchises,  privileges  and  unlimited  rights  in 
all  the  cities  and  towns  that  it  cared  to  "  tap."  I  know  no 
councils  so  "  respectable "  and  I  know  few  grants  more 
ridiculous  in  their  terms.  That  of  Bristol,  which  is  typical, 
gives  the  company  every  license,  excepting  that  it  is  sub- 
ject to  police  and  health  regulations  which  the  town  au- 
thorities shall  prescribe.  This  sounds  almost  "  socialistic  " 
in  Rhode  Island,  but  a  characteristic  clause  is  added: 
"  with  the  consent  of  the  company." 

But  Aldrich,  Perry  &  Co.  were  in  this  business  to  sell 
out,  and  they  had  to  have  a  perpetual  franchise.  They 
got  it,  and  the  act  by  which  they  got  it  is  the  "  smartest " 
piece  of  legislation  that  I  know  of  anywhere.  "  An  act 
to  increase  the  revenues  of  the  State,"  is  the  title.  The 
company,  having  failed  to  pay  to  the  City  of  Providence 
the  increased  tax  due,  was  being  annoyed  by  public 
clamor,  and  irresponsible  persons  were  beginning  to  take 
up  the  franchise  tax  notion.  To  head  off  all  such  danger- 
ous radicalism  once  and  forever,  the  company's  Legisla- 
ture put  a  State  tax  of  one  per  cent,  on  the  gross  earnings 
of  all  street-railway  companies,  this  to  be  "  in  lieu  and 


146     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

satisfaction  of  all  other  taxes,  excises,  burthens,  or  impo- 
sitions by  or  under  the  authority  of  the  State."  As  in  the 
Bristol  franchises,  as  in  the  Providence  transfer  act,  as  in 
practically  all  such  corporation  legislation  in  this  State, 
the  law,  however,  was  to  become  binding  only  when  each 
company  had  given  its  consent. 

But  all  this  is  by  the  way.  The  masterpiece  of  legisla- 
tive treason — for  it  is  no  less — in  this  act,  is  the  rest  of 
this  consent  clause;  which  says  that  when  the  company 
has  agreed,  the  act  "  shall  be  binding  and  in  full  force 
between  the  State  and  such  assenting  company,  and  shall 
not  be  altered  or  amended  without  the  consent  of  both 
parties."  Governor  Garvin  characterized  this  as  an  "  irre- 
pealable  law."  It  is  a  contract  between  United  States 
Senator  Aldrich  as  the  State  and  President  Nelson  W. 
Aldrich  of  the  street  railway  company,  by  which,  with- 
out the  consent  of  his  company,  his  State  cannot  tax  his 
company  or  alter  or  take  back  its  franchise.  It  passed, 
and  is  believed  by  the  company  to  be  what  Boss  Brayton 
calls  it,  a  "  perpetual  franchise." 

With  this  legislation,  these  remarkable  men  passed  for 
themselves  also  a  charter,  a  sort  of  omnibus  grant  to  lease, 
buy,  etc.,  etc.,  all  gas,  electric  light,  street-railway,  etc., 
etc.,  corporations  in  the  State.  This  also  was  irrepealablc, 
unlimited,  etc.,  etc. ;  it  was  for  a  company  to  "  hold  "  the 
public  utilities  in  the  State,  and  the  name  thereof  was, 
fittingly,  The  Rhode  Island  Company.  Even  Pennsylvania 
capital  could  ask  no  more  than  the  Rhode  Island  captains 
of  industry,  politics,  and  law  had  to  offer,  and  the  deal 
was  going  through  when  a  gross  error  was  made. 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  147 

There  had  been  some  outcry  at  the  doings  of  the  Legis- 
lature of  1902,  and  to  pacify  the  workingman  a  ten-hour 
law  was  enacted  for  street-railway .  conductors  and  motor- 
men.  The  company  consented  and  notice  was  posted  on 
the  car  barns.  Suddenly  the  notice  came  down,  and  Aldrich 
resigned  the  presidency  of  the  company.  It  is  understood 
that  the  "  Philadelphia  folks  kicked ;  said  they'd  agreed 
to  buy  an  eleven-hour  road,  and  they  wouldn't  take  a  ten- 
hour  road."  The  law  was  mandatory,  but  that  didn't  mat- 
ter to  the  Rhode  Island  Company.  They  refused  to  obey 
the  law. 

There  was  a  strike.  The  men  "  had  recourse  to  lawless- 
ness," especially  in  Pawtucket.  This  was  anarchy.  The 
company  was  breaking  a  law  itself,  but  that  wasn't  an- 
archy. Anarchy  arises  where  other  people  break  laws  and 
injure  my  property.  The  company  demanded  police  protec- 
tion, such  police  protection  as  it  had  in  Providence,  where 
the  State  controlled  the  city  police.  Not  satisfied  with  the 
conduct  of  the  Pawtucket  police,  they  had  deputy  sheriffs 
appointed  and  the  militia  called  out  to  enforce  the  law 
(against  the  men).  Thus  the  company  won  the  strike, 
but  the  law  that  caused  it  stood.  The  courts  were  asked 
to  declare  it  unconstitutional,  but  the  courts  could  not  see 
it  so,  and  the  company  was  in  a  bad  fix.  It  was  not  with- 
out resources,  however.  Rhode  Island  has  among  its  other 
preposterous  institutions  a  post-election  session  of  the 
Legislature.  The  General  Assembly  meets  in  the  winter, 
and  having  done  all  it  dares,  adjourns  till  after  election 
day  in  the  fall ;  then  the  expiring  body,  no  longer  answer- 
able at  the  polls,  does  what  the  "  power  behind  the  power  " 


148     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

directs.  After  the  election  of  1902  the  General  Assembly 
which  had  passed  it  unanimously  killed  that  ten-hour  law 
and  threatened  to  take  from  the  city  and  give  to  the 
State  the  control  of  the  Pawtucket  police ! 

Aldrich,  Perry  &  Co.  were  in  a  position  now  to  proceed 
with  their  business,  and  they  moved  fast.  We  need  not 
follow  them.  It  was  all  a  matter  of  high  finance.  By  a 
complicated  process  of  stock  transfers,  leases  (for  999 
years) ,  and  "  sales,"  all  among  themselves,  but  through 
the  medium  of  several  underlying  operating  and  holding 
companies,  they  managed  to  develop  a  total  capitalization 
of  $39,160,200,  while  they  stiU  left  the  control  of  the 
property  in  the  Rhode  Island  Company,  with  a  capital  of 
$2,000,000.  Perry  is  president  of  this  company,  but  the 
famous  U.  G.  I.  (the  United  Gas  Improvement  Co.)  of 
Philadelphia  owns  it.  What  the  promoter's  profits  are  I 
can't  reckon,  and  the  brokers  to  whom  I  applied  in  Provi- 
dence declared  they  couldn't ;  they  said  they  didn't  under- 
stand it  all.  This  much  is  certain,  however:  Aldrich, 
Perry,  and  Roelker  made  fortunes  out  of  it. 

They  made  these  fortunes  out  of  their  political  power, 
but,  as  one  of  their  defenders  said,  they  did  it  without 
breaking  a  law  or  committing  a  crime.  But  how  could 
they  commit  a  crime?  They  were  above  the  law.  It  was 
their  law;  they  made  it.  True,  they  disobeyed  the  ten- 
hour  law,  but  that  was  "  necessary,"  and  exceptional.  As 
in  Philadelphia  and  Pittsburg,  the  System  was  so  perfect 
that  all  they  had  to  do,  if  they  wished  to  commit  a  wrong, 
was  to  pass  a  law  to  make  it  right.  This  might  take  time, 
but  wherever  they  could  afford  the  time,  they  were  pa- 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  149 

tient.  See  how  they  waited,  three  or  four  years,  for  the 
irrepealable  law  that  gave  them  their  perpetual  franchises ! 

Of  course,  they  abused  the  law ;  they  abused  their  legis- 
lative powers  in  the  General  Assembly,  but  they  did  this 
in  the  interest  of  business.  "  This  is  a  business  country, 
and  the  government  is  there  to  help  business."  Is  it?  An 
ex^official  of  the  United  State  Treasury  Department,  who 
now  is  a  prominent  banker,  said  that  to  me  once,  and  it  is 
a  common  view  taken  by  business  men  of  the  corruption  of 
government  in  the  interest  of  business.  But  is  that  what 
"  the  government  is  there  for  "  ?  I  think  not.  I  think  that 
it  is  this  legitimate,  business  graft,  not  police  blackmail, 
which  is  the  chief  cause  of  our  political  corruption,  but 
this  is  no  place  for  "  academic  "  reflections.  The  point  is 
that  this  must  be  the  view  taken  of  political  power  by 
Marsden  J.  Perry,  one  of  the  typical  captains  of  in- 
dustry of  the  United  States,  and  by  Nelson  W.  Aldrich, 
the  head  of  a  State  and  of  the  United  States  Senate.  Let 
us  say,  however,  that  because  the  chosen  people  of  Rhode 
Island  sold  out  at  from  $5  to  $25  a  vote  the  sovereign 
power  of  the  State,  their  financial  and  political  repre- 
sentative had  a  right  to  sell  a  part  of  that  power  to  out- 
side capital  for  some  $40,000,000. 

The  next  question  is,  what  did  they  do  with  the  rest  of 
their  power?  They  ruled ;  how  did  they  rule?  Suppose  that 
it  was  right  for  them  to  rule  and,  ruling,  to  grant  them- 
selves extraordinary  privileges.  We  hear  that  we  cannot 
have  the  services  in  politics  and  government  of  able  busi- 
ness men  without  paying  for  it.  Let  us  put  this  forty  mil- 
lions down  as  fair  pay  for  the  privilege  Rhode  Island 


150     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

had  of  being  governed  by  the  ablest  business  men  in  the 
State.  What  have  the  business  rulers  of  Rhode  Island 
given  in  return? 

The  old  manufacturers,  having  got  what  they  wanted,  a 
protective  tariff,  gave  loyal  allegiance  to — what?  To  the 
State,  to  the  United  States?  No,  to  "the  party,"  to  the 
Republican  party.  They  let  Brayton  do  as  he  pleased 
with  the  State.  So  with  the  railroad.  The  New  York, 
New  Haven  and  Hartford  has  "  about  all  that  it  wants," 
but  for  "  protection  "  in  those  bribe-bought  rights,  for 
license  to  break  or  "  beat  the  law,"  it  supports  the  System. 
That  is  the  way  it  continues  to  pay  the  people  of  the  State, 
by  helping  to  keep  the  State  corrupt. 

And  as  for  the  Aldrich-Perry  trolley  crowd — their 
wants  were  very  large  and  they  were  so  exacting  and  so 
jealous  that  General  Brayton  often  complained  to  his 
lieutenants  about  them;  some  people  declare  that  the 
eleven-hour  labor  law  was  due  to  one  of  his  revolts.  And 
we  have  seen  that  he  had  to  condition  all  his  contracts  for 
legislation  with  the  understanding  that  the  street-railway 
had  first  call.  However,  the  street-railway  did  not  want 
everything.  What  of  the  rest? 

Boss  Brayton  could  do  what  he  would  with  what  was  left. 
They  didn't  care  apparently.  And  that  was  Brayton's  busi- 
ness, to  sell  the  rest.  A  man  could  go  to  Rhode  Island  and, 
if  he  respected  the  rights  of  the  trolley  crowd,  he  needn't 
pay  any  attention  to  the  rights  of  the  people  of  the  State. 
Rhode  Island  was,  and  it  is,  a  State  for  sale.  In  other 
words,  these  business  men's  business  government  was  a  gov- 
ernment of  boodle.  Having  their  "  legitimate  graft,"  they 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  151 

let  the  rest  be  held  for  sale  to  other  business  men  who  ap- 
plied with — fees.  Incredible?  What  else  did  General  Bray- 
ton  mean  when  he  said  that  in  addition  to  his  regular 
retainment  by  the  steam  and  electric  railways,  he  had 
"  connections,  not  permanent,  with  various  companies  de- 
siring franchises,  charters,  and  things  of  that  sort  from 
the  Legislature  "  ? 

Senator  Aldrich  declared  to  me,  in  the  face  of  all  this, 
that  his  government  of  Rhode  Island  was  "  good  govern- 
ment." Now,  he  means  what  men  of  his  class  usually  mean 
by  the  term:  an  administration,  convenient  and  liberal  to 
business,  but  strict  with  vice  and  disorder,  and  free  from 
scandals  and  petty  police  graft.  The  Senator  does  not 
know  whether  this  is  true  or  not,  nor  does  he  care  enough 
to  inform  himself.  He  is  an  inordinately  selfish  man,  so 
selfish  that  in  all  the  time  I  spent  in  his  State  I  did  not 
find,  even  among  his  associates,  a  single  warm  personal 
friend  of  the  man.  And  as  for  the  government  of  Rhode 
Island,  General  Brayton  summed  up  the  Senator's  attitude 
toward  that  when  he  told  Mr.  Lowry  that  Aldrich  took 
no  active  part  until  "  about  a  year  or  two  before  it  comes 
time  for  him  to  be  elected  again ;  then  he  gets  active." 

It  is  true  that  in  some  of  the  cities  and  towns  of  Rhode 
Island  petty  graft  has  been  neglected.  At  one  time  or 
another  this  evil  has  appeared  among  them,  but  the  small 
business  men  selected  for  the  council  of  Providence,  for 
example,  by  a  restricted  suffrage,  have  offended  chiefly 
on  the  side  of  supine  indulgence  toward  larger  business 
graft.  Just  now,  however,  the  trains  are  laid  for  the  de- 
velopment of  this  wretched  political-vice  business  there, 


152     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

and  a  man  who  has  the  confidence  of  Mr.  Perry,  and  is 
in  the  pay  of  Senator  Aldrich,  is  at  the  head  of  it;  his 
patrons  may  not  know  it,  but  I  believe  they  don't  care,  for 
the  same  man  is  corrupting  Democratic  leaders  and  wreck- 
ing the  opposition  organization ;  getting  it  to  put  up 
tickets  so  bad  that  the  Republicans  can  win.  The  Demo- 
cratic city  of  Pawtucket  is  subject  to  the  corrupt  control 
of  the  Third  Ward  Democratic  gang  in  combination  with 
one  branch  of  the  local  Republican  organization,  and 
when  a  Republican  leader  of  another  branch  pleaded  last 
fall  with  the  State  organization  to  cut  loose  from  this 
connection,  the  answer  he  received  was  "  not  this  year." 
"  This  year  "  a  Legislature  was  to  be  elected  to  return 
Aldrich  to  the  Senate. 

The  worst  case  of  "  good  government,"  however,  is  that 
of  Block  Island.  This  ocean  community  has  a  population 
of  1,396,  almost  all  descended  from  the  sixteen  original 
families  that  settled  there.  They  always  have  had  what 
they  call  a  "  king."  The  reigning  king  is  Christopher  E. 
Champlin,  State  Senator  and  a  "  Democrat."  But  Champ- 
lin  "  stood  in  "  with  Brayton,  and  this  is  what  Brayton's 
business  system  permitted  Champlin  to  do  to  his  own  peo- 
ple in  his  own  town : 

The  chief  business  of  the  Block  Islanders  is  that  of 
hotel  keeping.  Champlin  owns  one  of  the  largest  hotels. 
Most  of  the  traffic  and  most  of  the  hostelries  are  at  the 
eastern  end  of  the  island ;  Champlin's  hotel  is  at  the  other 
end.  Near  it  is  the  "  Great  Salt  Pond,"  which  the  Senator 
proposed  to  make  a  harbor  of  by  opening  a  breach  to  the 
ocean.  The  United  States  Government  said  it  was  not  a 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  153 

feasible  scheme;  the  channel  could  be  made,  but  the  sand 
drift  of  the  seashore  would  close  it.  The  State  authorized 
the  town  to  undertake  the  work,  the  State  to  pay  part, 
the  town  the  rest  with  money  loaned  by  the  State  from 
school  funds.  Year  by  year,  fresh  appropriations  had  to 
be  made  to  keep  open  the  breach,  till  the  State  had  spent 
$129,123.90,  the  town  $52,000.  Mr.  Edward  M.  Sullivan, 
a  young  lawyer  whom  Governor  Garvin  appointed  a  com- 
missioner to  investigate  the  situation,  reported  that  "  the 
harbor  is  used  exclusively  by  excursion  steamboats  and 
island  craft,"  for  which  there  was  already  a  haven. 
"  Some  local  interest  more  influential  than  the  demands 
of  coastwise  commerce  .  .  .  actuated  those  appropri- 
ations. The  opening  of  Great  Salt  Pond  was  manifestly 
designed  by  its  promoters,  who  are  the  principal  owners  of 
the  land  and  its  vicinity,  to  transfer  the  business  center 
...  to  the  head  of  Great  Salt  Pond.  .  .  .  Each 
of  these  appropriations  was  made  in  the  closing  hours  of 
the  session  .  .  .  and  were  not  included  in  the  appro- 
priation bill  of  the  committee  of  finance  of  any  year.  No 
report  of  the  expenditure  was  made  by  the  town  council 
or  the  State  committee  .  .  .  There  has  been  no  public 
bidding  or  competition  for  the  work,  which  has  been  done 
throughout  by  one  contractor,"  etc.,  etc. 

Besides  this  work,  Champlin  received  State  authority 
to  build  an  electric  railway  line  between  the  two  ends  of 
the  island.  Champlin  made  the  town  borrow  at  four  per 
cent,  the  money  on  which  the  road  was  to  pay  four  per 
cent.  The  town  pays  its  interest ;  but  the  horse-cars,  which 
are  all  there  is  of  the  electric  railway  company,  have  never 


154     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

made  any  accounting.  Also,  in  much  the  same  way,  he 
had  the  town  vote  a  steamboat,  which  he  ordered  of  such  a 
draft  that  it  could  enter  his  but  not  the  town  harbor.  The 
town  passed  the  legal  limit  of  indebtedness,  and  the  citizens 
were  worried,  but  Champlin  "  owns  "  the  council  of  five 
members — his  brother,  his  father-in-law,  another  relative, 
and  two  loyal  followers  of  his.  The  "  town  "  voted  his 
measure,  and  it  might  as  well,  for  if  it  failed  to  the  Legis- 
lature would.  Brayton's  General  Assembly  enacts  special 
legislation  so  freely  that  I  had  almost  forgotten  to  men- 
tion this  absurdity  explicitly.  Besides  the  police  of  Provi- 
dence and  Newport,  the  State  has  taken  the  election  ma- 
chinery .  and  many  other  local  offices  and  functions  from 
municipalities  that  have  "  gone  Democratic,"  and  where 
it  has  set  up  bipartisan  boards,  Republicans  select  the 
Democrats  and  thus  use  this  power  to  corrupt  the  minority 
organization.  The  General  Assembly,  corrupt  itself,  is  a 
corrupting  upper  council  for  every  municipality  in  the 
State,  as  Block  Island  illustrates:  A  majority  of  the  voters 
then  declared,  six  years  or  so  ago,  under  the  local  option 
law,  for  absolute  prohibition  on  the  island,  but  Champlin 
put  through  the  General  Assembly  a  special  act  permitting 
the  sale  of  liquor  on  Block  Island.  Again,  the  Society  for 
the  Prevention  of  Cruelty  to  Animals  arrested  a  street-car 
driver  for  driving  the  pitiful  horses  that  draw  the  miserable 
cars  of  the  Champlin  line.  The  General  Assembly  passed 
a  special  act  which  prevented  such  interference  by  the 
society  in  this  one  town ! 

They  will  tell  you  in  Rhode  Island  that  Block  Island 
is  an  exceptional  case.  It  isn't.  It  is  typical;  on  a  small 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  155 

scale  it  is  like  the  case  of  Providence.  But  suppose  we 
grant  that  it  is  extraordinary — it  happened,  it  was  pos- 
sible. Doesn't  it  show  that  if  you  or  I  should  go  to  a  small 
town  of  Rhode  Island,  get  political  control,  and  send  our- 
selves to  the  General  Assembly,  we  could  do  what  we  would 
to  our  town  ?  If  we  delivered  to  Aldrich,  Perry,  and  Bray- 
ton  the  things  that  are  Caesar's,  couldn't  we  have  our  Salt 
Pond,  our  poor  little  street-car  line,  and  our  great  public 
debt?  "Ah,  but,"  they  told  me  at  first,  "  Champlin  is  a 
Democrat,  and  the  Republican  party  cannot  be  blamed 
for  his  misdeeds."  Champlin,  the  Democrat,  was  repudi- 
ated by  his  own  party,  and  the  Republican  party  took  him 
up.  He  fought  for  his  place  in  his  party,  and  while  he 
was  making  the  contest  for  his  "  good  Democratic  stand- 
ing," with  a  group  of  his  own  party  for  him,  this  man 
was  the  regular  Republican  leader  in  the  Republican  State 
Senate ! 

Both  parties  betrayed  the  common  interests  of  this 
State.  Political-financial,  the  System  is  bipartisan,  too, 
especially  in  the  Democratic  municipalities  where,  as  in 
Providence,  certain  Democratic  leaders  sell  outright  to 
the  Republicans ;  or  where,  as  in  Pawtucket,  the  worst 
elements  in  both  parties  combine  to  graft  upon  the  city ; 
or  as  in  Bristol,  where  they  trade,  the  Democrats  sharing 
the  council  and  giving  the  Republicans  the  legislative 
delegation.  Colonel  Colt,1  the  great  manufacturer  and 
financier,  controls  Bristol,  and  when  he  ran  on  the  Re- 
publican ticket  for  Governor  a  year  ago  the  Democrats, 

i  Colonel  Colt  is  a  candidate  now   (1906)    for  the  junior  United 
States  Senatorship  for  Rhode  Island. 


156     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

who  used  to  carry  the  town,  put  up  no  legislative  ticket. 
There  are  many  exceptions  among  both  "  organizations  " 
and  leaders,  but  they  are  indeed  exceptions.  Generally 
speaking,  the  people  of  Rhode  Island  are  represented  only 
by  individuals  and  they  can  do  nothing  but  protest.  One 
of  these  protestants  was  Dr.  Garvin,  but  he  was  Governor 
of  the  State  and  powerless. 

This  country  doctor  is  the  most  singular  figure  in 
American  politics.  A  New  Englander  reared  down  South, 
he  attended  a  Friends'  school,  and  traces  of  all  these  in- 
fluences are  marked  in  his  character.  A  single-taxer,  an 
individualist,  an  advocate  of  the  "  popular  initiative  for 
constitutional  amendments  " — this  sweet-tempered  radical 
who  has  stood  for  every  reform  that  looked  in  the  direc- 
tion of  democracy,  marched,  unmoved  by  ridicule,  abuse, 
or  defeat,  without  a  sign  of  anger  or  of  pain,  straight 
into  the  confidence  of  a  majority  of  the  voters  of  this  con- 
servative New  England  community. 

When  the  slowly  rising  discontent  in  the  State  ap- 
proached the  height  of  a  majority,  the  Democratic  party 
nominated  Dr.  Garvin,  and  his  party,  with  help  from  in- 
dependent Republicans,  Prohibitionists,  Socialists — all  the 
opposition  to  the  System  that  usually  scatters,  voted  for 
him.  He  was  elected  in  1902  and  again  in  1903.  He  was 
elected  as  a  protest,  however,  and  that  is  all  he  has  been. 
He  could  not  be  Governor  in  fact;  General  Brayton  was 
that.  As  we  have  seen,  the  gubernatorial  chair  never  had 
amounted  to  much  more  than  an  empty  honor  for  "  safe 
men."  No  veto  power  went  with  it,  and  the  appointive 
power  was  really  wielded  by  Brayton  in  the  interest  of  the 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  157 

macliine  of  the  System.  A  Governor  like  Dr.  Garvin  would 
have  made  his  own  appointments,  but  Brayton  and  the 
System  had  seen  Governor  Garvin  coming.  They  rifled  the 
office  before  he  got  into  it.  When  this  Aldrich-Perry- 
Brayton  company  foresaw  that  the  people  might  elect  a 
Governor  to  represent  the  common  interests  of  the  State, 
they  had  the  appointive  power  transferred  to  the  Senate. 
They  left  it  so  that  a  "  safe  "  Republican  Governor,  obedi- 
ent to  them,  might  seem  to  appoint,  but  not  a  "  danger- 
ous "  Democrat  like  Dr.  Garvin.  The  Governor's  nomina- 
tions go  to  the  Senate,  which  may  confirm  or  reject  or 
ignore  them;  and,  if  it  ignores  them  for  three  days,  this 
Senate,  constituted  as  we  have  seen,  may  proceed  to  make 
its  own  appointments.  The  United  States  Senate  in  its 
dignity  is  sensitive  about  the  independence  of  the  (upper) 
legislative  branch  of  the  government,  and  it  is  jealous  of 
any  encroachment  by  the  executive.  Its  leader,  Mr.  Al*- 
drich,  comes  honestly  by  his  senatorial  sensitiveness ;  where 
he  comes  from,  the  executive,  representing  a  majority  of 
all  the  voters,  is  something  which  the  Senate,  representing 
the  System,  ignores,  overrides,  and  insults,  and,  as  for 
encroachment,  that  is  a  sacred  prerogative  of  the  legisla- 
tive branch. 

Such,  then,  is  the  government  of  Rhode  Island.  Such  is 
the  System  that  has  developed  with  a  restricted  suffrage, 
with  the  balance  of  power  against  the  cities,  with  business 
men  conducting  both  politics  and  government.  What  is 
the  matter?  What  is  the  cure?  The  local  reformers  think 
that  these  very  features  which  other  reformers  yearn 
for  are  the  cause  of  the  Rhode  Island  troubles,  and  that 


158     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

the  constitution,  "  which  did  it,"  must  be  changed.  A  new 
constitution  is  indispensable  to  Rhode  Island.  Theoreti- 
cally it  is  unjust,  in  practice  it  is  tyranny,  to  maintain 
a  government  controlled  by  the  purchase  of  twenty  country 
districts  which  poll  less  than  one-eleventh  of  the  vote  of 
the  State.  But  the  old  constitution  did  not  "  do  it."  This 
instrument  facilitated,  it  did  not  produce,  the  System,  and 
a  new  constitution  will  not  destroy  it.  Other  States,  with 
constitutions  as  ingenious  as  the  best  that  the  reformers 
in  Rhode  Island  can  hope  for,  have  developed  essentially 
the  same  System.  The  Enemies  of  the  Republic  will  over- 
come any  obstacle  that  is  merely  constitutional,  legal,  or 
mechanical. 

The  trouble  lies  deeper,  and  the  cure  must  cut  deeper. 
We  have  blamed  our  laws  and  our  constitution  long 
enough,  and  in  turn  we  have  charged  our  disgrace  to 
our  foreign  population,  to  the  riffraff  of  the  cities,  to  our 
politicians,  to  our  business  men.  And  now,  in  Rhode 
Island,  the  American  farmer  is  the  guilty  fool  and  his 
fellow-culprits  are  American  captains  of  finance,  law,  and 
politics.  Are  they  alone  at  fault?  I  cannot  see  it  so.  It 
seems  to  me  that,  in  one  way  or  another,  we  all  are  at 
fault.  The  provision  of  the  Rhode  Island  constitution 
which  lodged  the  dominant  power  out  in  the  country, 
simply  pointed  to  the  farmer  as  the  first  man  to  corrupt ; 
and  he  proved  corruptible  only  because  the  strain  came 
hardest  upon  him.  His  power  should  be  spread  out  over 
the  whole  population,  but  then  the  pressure  will  bear 
hardest  upon  the  political  representatives  of  the  people, 
and  we  know  from  other  States  that  the  representatives 


A    CORRUPTED    PEOPLE  159 

will  sell,  if  there  are  offers  to  buy ;  and  we  know  that  the 
business  representatives  will  offer  to  buy.  And  we  know 
that  we  all  will  condone  or  submit,  for  some  consideration 
— cash  or  protection,  office  or  friendship,  party  loyalty 
or  comfort.  The  best  hope  of  Rhode  Island,  for  example, 
should  be  in  the  leadership  of  the  old  manufacturing 
families,  and  the  best  of  this  aristocratic  class  have  voted 
for  Dr.  Garvin.  But  would  they  if  his  office  were  not  pow- 
erless? They  told  me,  these  gentlemen,  that  Aldrich  did 
not  represent  them  or  their  State.  "  He  may  represent 
our  corrupt  towns  and  your  own  New  York,"  they  said, 
"  but  he  doesn't  represent  Rhode  Island ! "  Yet  Governor 
Garvin  was  defeated  this  year  (by  some  500  votes)  be- 
cause a  Republican  President  had  to  be  elected,  and  a 
Legislature  to  return  to  the  United  States  Senate  the 
arch-representative  of  protected,  privileged  business.2 

Aldrich  does  represent  Rhode  Island,  and  that  is  what 
is  the  matter  with  Rhode  Island,  and  that  is  what  is  the 
matter  with  Aldrich.  And  he  represents  the  rest  of  us, 
and  that  is  what  is  the  matter  with  all  of  us.  Rhode 
Island  will  have  reform  when  we  all  have  reform;  when 
we  are  all  willing  to  make  sacrifices  for  the  sake  of  our 
country  and  our  self-respect ;  when  the  American  farmer 
will  give  up  his  two  or  thirty  dollars  "  pay  for  time  lost 
in  voting  " ;  when  the  business  man  will  be  content  to  do 
a  little  less  "  business  " ;  when  the  manufacturer  will  risk 
his  unnecessary  protective  tariff  (the  graft,  not  the  pro- 

2  Dr.  Garvin  was  renominated  for  Governor  in  1905  at  the  head  of 
a  fusion  ticket,  and  he  and  his  ticket  were  defeated  by  an  increased 
majority  for  the  System's  ticket. 


160     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

tection)  ;  when  the  captains  of  finance  will  be  content  with 
honest  profit ;  when  the  clergy  will  face  "  the  loss  of  their 
position,"  and  "  financial  grief  and  ruin,"  rather  than 
"  be  put  under  the  ban  of  political  immorality,  and  forced 
to  acquiesce  in  evil."  The  Republican  hope  of  compelling 
the  other  fellow  to  quit  "  within  the  party,"  is  stupid ;  re- 
form within  a  party  so  degraded  and  so  happy  as  "  the 
party  "  in  Rhode  Island  is  impossible.  The  Democratic 
party  may  prove  a  good  engine  for  the  work  ahead,  but 
the  notion  of  those  of  its  leaders  who  think  to  restore  pure, 
representative  democracy  by  buying  up  the  people  for  a 
year  or  two,  is  American  corruption  carried  to  the  limit 
of  Anglo-Saxon  hypocrisy.  There  is  no  reform  but  re- 
form, and  reform  begins  at  home — with  all  of  us. 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES 

SHOWING   BUSINESS   RULERS  OF  A  STATE   RESORTING 
TO  ANARCHY  TO  CHECK  MUNICIPAL  REFORM 

THE  story  of  the  latter-day  politics  of  Ohio,  as  I  under- 
stand the  State,  can  best  be  told  as  a  tale  of  two  of  her 
cities:  Cleveland  and  Cincinnati;  Cleveland,  the  metrop- 
olis of  her  Northeast,  Cincinnati,  the  metropolis  of  her 
Southwest ;  Cleveland,  the  best  governed  city  in  the  United 
States,  Cincinnati,  the  worst. 

Cleveland  is,  and  except  during  one  short  period,  always 
has  been  a  business  man's  government.  The  New  York 
Sun  wondered  once  how  it  happened  so  often  that  in  Ohio 
men  who  had  spent  the  better  part  of  their  lives  in  busi- 
ness could  step  into  politics  up  near  the  top  and  prove 
themselves  first-rate  politicians  from  the  start.  The  ex- 
planation is  simple.  Those  Ohio  men  came  from  Cleveland. 
If  I  remember  aright,  the  Sun  had  in  mind  the  sudden 
appearance  of  the  late  Mr.  Hanna  in  national  politics 
with  the  nomination  of  Mr.  McKinley  for  President.  Mr. 
Hanna  had  been  in  politics  for  years.  Mr.  Hanna  is  one 
type  of  the  business  men  who  have  ruled  the  City  of  Cleve- 
land. There  are  other  types,  as  we  shall  see,  but  we  must 
begin  with  Marcus  A.  Hanna.  He  is  dead.  I  don't  be- 
lieve in  "nothing  but  good  of  the  dead  ";  I  believe  that 
true  obituaries  of  our  great  men  would  do  the  living  good. 

161 


162     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

But  I  hoped  to  be  able  to  tell  about  Ohio  without  saying 
much  about  Mr.  Hanna.  That  is  impossible.  You  can't 
understand  Cleveland,  and  you  can't  understand  Ohio, 
without  understanding  Mark  Hanna.  And  you  can't 
understand  the  American  people  and  the  United  States 
without  seeing  Hanna,  as  he  was — good  and  bad,  a  delight 
and  a  danger,  a  business  man  in  politics,  a  business  man 
who  dominated  a  city,  became  United  States  Senator  and 
the  boss  of  a  State,  became  national  head  of  the  dominant 
national  party  and  was  the  choice  of  big  business  and  bad 
machine  politics  for  President  of  the  United  States. 

What  sort  of  man  was  this?  He  was  "our  sort." 
Hanna  was  American.  There  are  traits  American  which 
he  lacked,  but  taken  as  he  stood  there  was  not  a  fiber  of  his 
make-up,  not  a  fault,  not  a  virtue,  that  is  not  of  us.  Of 
Quaker  stock  from  the  Virginias,  he  was  born  near  Ohio's 
Western  Reserve  and  the  West  made  him  ripe  and  rich. 
Hanna  described  himself  once.  In  the  campaign  against 
Mayor  Jones,  who  was  running  for  Governor,  he  got 
into  a  hall  full  of  Welshmen.  Jones  was  Welsh,  and 
the  crowd  jeered  at  Hanna  so  that  he  could  not  go  on  with 
his  speech.  "  There's  a  lot  of  American  in  me,"  he  shouted. 
"  There's  some  Scotch.  Somewheres  'way  back,  there  is 

Irish  blood.  But  by ,  there's  no  Welsh.  If  there  was, 

I'd  go  down  there  and  lick  the  whole  lot  of  you."  That 
won  the  Welshmen.  They  cheered  and  they  listened  while 
Hanna  gave  Jones  and  the  Welsh  fits. 

That  was  Hanna,  mixed,  but  well  mixed,  and,  as  the 
politicians  say,  a  "  good  mixer."  He  was  the  fighter  who 
can  laugh  in  his  wrath,  but  won't  compromise.  "  Well, 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES 

what  is  your  bill?  "  he  was  heard  to  demand  of  two  lobby- 
ists in  the  Marble  Room  of  the  United  States  Senate  one 
day.  They  murmured  some  reply.  "  Well,  he  don't  deserve 
it  and  he  don't  get  it,"  said  Hanna  aloud,  and  he  stumped 
off  to  leave  them.  Then  he  stopped.  "  Say,  have  you  two 

cusses  had  your  lunch?  No?  Well,  I'll  give  ye  a 

good  lunch,  but  that's  all  you  do  get." 

Intimate,  even  familiar,  Hanna  was  always  Hanna,  in 
all  places,  to  all  men.  It  is  related  that  at  the  first  inaug- 
uration of  President  McKinley,  when  he  and  Hanna  rode 
together  from  the  Capitol  to  the  White  House,  Mr.  Mc- 
Kinley pointed  out  of  the  carriage  to  the  Post  Office  Build- 
ing and  admired  it.  "  Well,  that  shows  how  little  you 
know  about  architecture,"  said  Hanna. 

The  dominant  trait  of  Hanna's  character  was  domina- 
tion. He  was  our  aggressive  type  of  the  egotist.  He  may 
not  have  meant  to  be  selfish.  Hanna  was  our  man  of  brains, 
not  of  mind.  When  he  was  a  boy  he  showed  some  inclina- 
tion to  read  books,  but  his  father,  Dr.  Leonard  Hanna, 
a  sturdy  man,  noticed  it.  "  Mark,"  he  would  call  up  the 
stairs,  "  what  are  you  doing  up  there  ?  Reading,  eh  ? 
Well,  you  come  down  here,  and  saw  wood."  So  the  boy 
was  cured  of  this  taste ;  the  man  hardly  read  at  all.  When 
he  wasn't  sawing  wood,  he  was  playing  cards.  He  played 
in  the  daytime,  and  in  the  evening  it  was  his  favorite 
form  of  amusement  to  play  a  game  with  as  many  of  his 
friends  as  he  could  get  around  him,  and  if  no  friends 
came,  Mr.  Hanna  played  solitaire. 

We  admire  self-sufficiency,  we  Americans,  and  no  mat- 
ter if  they  do  trample  upon  us,  we  want  to  see  the  strong 


STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

men  win.  We  are  like  the  American  parent,  who,  because 
the  baby  is  lusty  and  big,  lets  it  pull  off  the  table-cloth 
and  break  the  dishes.  Well,  our  young  male  was  strong, 
and  he  began  early  to  grab.  When  the  family  moved  to 
Cleveland  (in  1852)  the  father  founded  the  wholesale 
grocery  firm  of  Hanna,  Garretson  &  Co.  Mark  went  to 
school  for  a  while,  then  he  worked  in  the  store,  then  he 
served  as  clerk  in  a  Lake  Superior  carrying  vessel.  The 
Superior  iron  regions  were  opening  and  the  Hannas  saw 
things.  They  went  into  iron  and  steel  and  ships,  as  well 
as  groceries  and  supplies.  Mark  married  (in  1862)  a 
daughter  of  D.  P.  Rhodes,  fondly  known  as  "  Old  Dan 
Rhodes,"  a  pioneer  grown  rich  in  the  iron  and  coal  trade. 
Mark  joined  the  firm  of  D.  P.  Rhodes  &  Co.  There  were 
other  sons  and  partners  in  the  business,  but  by  1885  they 
all  were  out  or  reduced  to  M.  A.  Hanna  &  Co.,  mines, 
ships,  coal,  oil,  iron-ore,  and  pig-iron.  Then  M.  A.  Hanna 
got  into  a  stove  company,  other  mining  companies,  banks, 
and  shipbuilding,  a  newspaper,  a  theater.  It's  a  long 
story ;  it's  the  good  old  story,  oft  told  and  never  explained. 
I  heard,  from  men  with  feelings  sore  after  all  these  years, 
of  quick  turns,  hard  fights,  and  brutal  force.  But  that 
was  Mark  having  his  way,  and,  I  guess,  that  is  the  way 
of  success.  Certainly  Hanna  was  the  true  type  of  our 
successful  men  of  big  business.  They  are  men  in  whom  a 
want  is,  not  like  yours,  perhaps,  or  mine,  humble,  hope- 
ful, and  capable  of  dismissal  unsatisfied;  a  want  with  the 
Hannas  is  a  lust ;  no  matter  how  big  or  how  little,  no  mat- 
ter how  vicious  or  how  innocent,  it  is  Hanna's  want;  it 
must  be  sated,  and  it  must  be  sated  now. 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        165 

One  of  Hanna's  young  wants  was  a  street  railway.  He 
had  largely  of  the  earth,  and  of  the  waters  under  the 
earth ;  he  had  reached  out  far  beyond  Cleveland  and  Ohio 
for  possessions,  into  Minnesota  and  New  York,  Michigan 
and  Pennsylvania;  and  his  hands  were  full.  But  he  had 
no  street  railway.  Of  course,  he  got  one.  He  was  let  into 
the  West  Side  Company  of  Cleveland,  Elias  Sims,  presi- 
dent, and  two  years  later  (in  1882)  Sims  resigned  and  M. 
A.  Hanna  became  president.  And  that's  how  Hanna  hap- 
pened to  go  into  politics. 

Mr.  Hanna  did  not  want  to  go  into  politics.  He  had  to. 
It  was  necessary  to  his  business  that  he  should,  and  it  was 
for  the  sake  of  his  business  that  he  did ;  not  for  the  party, 
not  for  the  city,  not  to  better  things,  not  even  for  the  sport 
of  it.  As  a  young  fellow,  he  had  "  batted  around  "  some 
in  his  ward,  for  fun;  but  there  was  nothing  in  that  for 
him,  so  he  wasn't  regular  about  it.  I  inquired  closely 
into  this,  for  I  wanted  to  be  sure  that  I  wasn't  on  another 
"  low  down  politician's "  trail.  Mr.  Hanna  went  into 
politics  as  a  business  man,  and  he  always  called  himself 
a  business  man  in  politics. 

And,  as  a  business  man  in  politics  he  corrupted  politics. 
Mr.  Hanna  boodled.  He  degraded  the  municipal  legis- 
lature of  Cleveland.  I  don't  say  he  did  it  alone;  I  don't 
say  he  started  it;  I  don't  say  he  wanted  to  do  that.  All 
Mr.  Hanna  wanted  was  that  horse-car  line,  and  then  some 
extensions,  and  then  some  more  franchises.  But  these  he 
did  want,  these  and  other  valuable  privileges.  Since  he 
wanted  them,  he  must  have  them,  and  since  the  business 
way  to  get  a  thing  is  to  go  and  pay  for  it  and  get  it,  Mr. 


166     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

Hanna  went  and  got  his  privileges.  He  bought  and  paid 
for  them.  I  don't  say  he  paid  all  this  in  bribes,  nor  do  I 
say  that  he  paid  bribes  with  his  own  hands.  That  isn't 
the  way  a  Big  Business  man  does  big  business.  That  isn't 
the  System. 

The  System  in  Cleveland  at  that  time  was  simple  and  im- 
perfect. Business  men  supported  it.  There  was  no  boss, 
and  such  leading  politicians  as  the  city  boasted  were 
nothing  but  business  men's  political  agents.  They  de- 
pended largely  upon  the  campaign  funds  contributed  by 
the  business  men.  In  return  the  business  men  could  get 
what  they  wanted  out  of  the  city,  and  they  let  the  poli- 
ticians do  about  as  they  pleased  with  the  rest.  The  street 
railways  and  the  other  public  utility  companies  which 
had  the  most  to  ask,  attended  to  this  political  business. 
Not  all  of  them.  Cleveland  is  in  many  respects  an  ex- 
ceptional community.  There  are,  and  there  seem  always 
to  have  been,  men  of  business  there  who  disapprove  of 
boodling  and  corruption,  and  one  of  the  street-railway 
presidents,  Mr.  Horace  E.  Andrews,  has  refused  always 
to  aid  corruption  in  any  disguise.  But  Hanna  and  two 
others  have  had  no  such  scruples.  They  kept  men  to  do 
"  dirty  business "  for  them,  and  these  men  were  the 
"  bosses "  for  many  years.  Hanna's  man  was  George 
Mulhern,  an  employee  of  the  West  Side  Company.  Hanna 
sometimes  served  as  treasurer  of  the  campaign  fund,  and, 
in  hot  fights,  often  directed  the  politics  of  the  West  Side 
and,  indeed,  of  the  whole  city. 

All  he  wanted,  however,  was  the  right  kind  of  a  Mayor, 
and  his  share  of  the  councilmen.  These  he  secured,  he  or 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        167 

Mulhern  or  both,  by  supervising  nominations  and  paying 
individual  campaign  expenses.  Other  street  railways  did 
much  the  same.  Usually  they  had  among  them  enough 
councilmen  to  form  a  combine  which  controlled  legisla- 
tion. If  they  lacked  some,  if  they  hadn't  bought  sufficiently 
in  advance,  or  if  an  unexpected  emergency  arose,  they 
bought  more.  They  didn't  always  use  cash  bribery.  Mul- 
hern, who  picked  the  president  and  organized  councils, 
came  to  control  more  and  more  departments,  and  he  had 
the  patronage  of  these  to  dispense  to  the  friends  and 
followers  of  pliable  councilmen.  But  this  was  making  the 
city  pay  for  its  own  corruption,  and  it  not  only  saved 
Hanna  and  the  company  some  costs,  it  strengthened  the 
machine. 

This  was  a  government  by  the  public  utility  companies. 
These  councilmen,  elected  as  representatives  of  the  whole 
community,  represented  in  fact  Mr.  Hanna  and  the  other 
holders  of  public  franchises.  Of  course  there  was  other 
"  business  "  to  be  done.  Mulhern  with  the  other  railway 
politicians  handled  it.  They  let  privileges,  legitimate  and 
illegitimate,  to  their  friends  and  Hanna's  friends,  and  after 
these,  to  all  comers.  Citizens  have  told  me  how  they  were 
referred  from  the  City  Hall  to  the  West  Side  Company 
offices,  when  they  called  on  business.  There  was  the  head 
of  the  government,  and  it  was  not  a  very  bad  government, 
not  in  the  Tammany  sense.  There  was  not  much  police 
blackmail,  for  example;  it  was  financial,  respectable  cor- 
ruption that  prevailed,  and  "  good  citizens  "  do  not  resent 
that  so  much.  It  is  quiet,  it  is  convenient;  it  is  theirs;  it 
is  the  System.  Hanna's  government  of  Cleveland  was  a 


168     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

government  of  the  people  by  politicians  hired  to  represent 
the  privileged  class. 

This  is  the  most  dangerous  form  of  our  corruption ;  the 
most  dangerous  for  this  class  as  well.  And  yet  the  political 
greatness  of  Mr.  Hanna  was  rooted  in  such  corruption, 
and  his  political  hopes  were  the  hopes  of  this  class.  Hanna 
may  not  have  thought  so.  Hanna  wasn't  a  thinker,  he 
was  a  man  of  instinct  and  action,  and  his  unconscious 
selfishness  hurt  his  effectiveness.  The  fate  of  his  primitive 
machine  shows  that.  He  did  not  keep  it  up  regularly. 
When  he  wanted  something,  he  worked  hard  at  the  organ- 
ization; when  he  wanted  nothing  in  particular,  he  was 
slack  about  it.  A  business  man  in  politics,  he  ran 
politics  for  business,  not  for  political  ends.  Some  political 
honors  came  to  him.  He  went  to  conventions.  He  saw  how 
Governors  were  made,  and  Presidents.  A  delegate  to  the 
National  Republican  Convention  of  1888,  he  was  for  John 
Sherman,  and  he  missed  a  hand  In  the  making  of  Presi- 
dent Harrison.  Whether  that  humble  failure  suggested 
it  or  not,  I  do  not  know,  but  all  the  world  knows  that 
Hanna  came  to  have  a  great  ambition  that  was  political. 
He  wanted  to  have  a  President.  He  chose  William  Mc- 
Kinley,  and  he  planned  for  years  his  nomination  in 
1896.  That  he  succeeded,  everybody  knows.  Hanna  often 
laughed,  in  his  merry  way,  at  the  "  spontaneous  demand  " 
for  McKinley,  which  swept  over  the  country  at  just  the 
right  time.  There  was  such  a  demand,  and  much  of  it 
was  spontaneous,  but  Hanna  organized  it.  He  dotted  the 
country  with  men  primed  to  shout  at  a  signal,  and  when 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        169 

he  gave  the  word,  the  wave  rose  and  rolled  in  upon  the 
convention  where  Hanna  was  dickering  for  its  enthusiastic 
reception. 

And  Hanna  won  with  McKinley  and  money,  Hanna  and 
the  System — in  the  United  States.  What  of  Ohio?  "What 
of  Cleveland?  When  the  organizer  of  the  National  Re- 
publican machine  came  home,  he  had  no  organization. 
Having  wanted  very  little  from  the  State,  he  had  neglected 
the  State  machine,  and  it  was  in  the  control  of  the  Cox- 
Foraker  wing  of  the  party.  And  he  had  lost  also  his  own 
city.  A  group  of  common  politicians,  weary  of  the  selfish- 
ness of  his  street-railway  government,  had  set  out  the  year 
before  (1895)  to  organize  the  party  along  political,  not 
business,  lines.  They  made  Hanna  and  the  street  railways 
the  issue  and,  nominating  an  obscure  young  lawyer,  Robert 
E.  McKisson,  for  Mayor,  they  beat  easily  Hanna's  lop- 
sided old  occasional  machine.  McKisson,  dismissing  his 
creators,  built  for  himself;  but  he  built  on  politics  and 
political  graft,  and  the  McKisson  organization  was  the 
best  machine  the  Republicans  have  ever  had  in  Cleveland. 
But  it  was  an  anti-Hanna  machine. 

And  thus  began  the  making  of  the  Ohio  of  Hanna,  which 
is  the  Ohio  of  to-day.  Whenever  the  forces  of  corruption 
are  beaten  in  a  city,  they  retreat  to  the  State.  Hanna  had 
two  wants  which  Cleveland  could  not  or  would  not  satisfy. 
He  wanted  to  be  a  United  States  Senator  and  he  wanted 
an  extension  of  certain  of  his  street-railway  franchises. 
All  the  traction  interests  of  Cleveland  had  been  combined 
into  two  consolidations,  the  "  Big  Con,"  Horace  Andrews, 


170     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

president ;  and  the  "  Little  Con,"  Mark  Hanna,  president. 
Both  had  franchises  expiring  in  the  near  future,  and  the 
State  Legislature  had  just  enacted  the  Rogers  law,  which 
permitted  cities  to  grant  extensions  for  fifty  years.  This 
law  was  passed  by  the  Cox-Foraker  crowd  for  the  Cin- 
cinnati traction  interest,  but  it  was  good  in  Cleveland 
while  it  lasted.  There  was  the  rub,  however.  The  people 
were  indignant  at  this  piece  of  legislation ;  it  might  be  re- 
pealed. Hanna  and  his  associates  had  to  hurry;  and  that 
politician,  "  Bob  "  McKisson,  would  not  hurry.  He  would 
negotiate,  however,  and  there  was  some  dickering.  Just 
what  the  dealing  was  I  do  not  know,  of  course.  The  Mc- 
Kissonites  say  a  big  offer  was  made  to  the  Mayor  and  that 
he  refused  it.  The  Hanna  people  say  the  Mayor  asked 
for  money  and  that  they  refused  it.  This  much  is  certain : 
Mr.  Andrews  was  asked  to  meet  Mayor  McKisson  at  the 
Hollenden  Hotel ;  telling  some  of  his  associates  about  it,  he 
went  there;  when  he  returned  he  reported  that  he  had 
entered  the  appointed  room,  and  that  there,  in  the  dark, 
Mr.  McKisson  began  talking  about  land  to  be  had  out 
near  Andrews's  country  place.  Mr.  Andrews  may  have 
been  mistaken,  but  he  understood  this  to  have  been  an 
approach,  and  he  left  the  Mayor  abruptly.  Soon  there- 
after a  definite  proposition  of  corruption  was  made,  not, 
however,  by  the  Mayor,  but  the  railway  people  certainly 
believed  it  was  authoritative.  The  associates  of  Mr. 
Andrews  wanted  to  accept  it,  and  the  Hanna  people  were 
eager  for  the  deal.  And  when  Mr.  Andrews  refused  to 
countenance  it,  there  was  trouble  in  his  board  and  he  re- 
signed. Why  the  subsequent  negotiation  fell  through,  I 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        171 

do  not  fully  understand.  James  Parmelee,  the  president, 
now,  of  the  lighting  company,  who  was  to  take  Mr.  An- 
drews's  place,  considered  making  the  deal;  but,  upon  the 
advice  of  friends  that  it  would  be  suicidal  to  put  such 
business  through  with  the  whole  city  looking  on  and  sus- 
pecting the  purpose  of  his  succession  to  Mr.  Andrews,  Mr. 
Parmelee  decided  against  the  job,  and  Mr.  Andrews  re- 
sumed his  office.  As  for  the  other  company,  I  was  told 
that  the  McKissonites  would  not  do  business  with  the 
"  Little  Con  "  alone.  However  that  may  be,  from  that  time 
on  the  Hanna  Republicans  cursed  for  a  "  Corruptionist  " 
"  Bob "  McKisson,  who  prevented  Hanna  from  getting 
his  franchise  extensions  from  his  own  city. 

Meanwhile  Mr.  Hanna  had  been  making  mad  rushes 
for  his  senatorship.  There  was  no  vacancy  in  the  Senate 
from  Ohio,  but  that  did  not  matter.  One  was  created.  The 
President  took  John  Sherman,  the  senior  Ohio  Senator,  into 
the  cabinet.  Poor  old  John  Sherman!  He  didn't  want  to 
be  Secretary  of  State ;  his  mind  was  failing  and  he  wanted 
only  to  be  let  alone.  But  there  was  Hanna  with  a  Hanna 
want ;  it  must  be  satisfied,  so  Sherman  was  moved  and  the 
next  thing  was  to  get  Hanna  appointed.  It  was  rather 
late  to  set  about  arranging  this  detail,  but  Hanna  crossed 
bridges  when  he  came  to  them.  Governor  Bushnell  hated 
Hanna.  Bushnell  was  a  friend  of  the  junior  Ohio  Senator, 
Joseph  B.  Foraker,  who  hated  Hanna  who  hated  him.  If 
Hanna  had  had  control  in  Cleveland  he  might  have  forced 
terms,  but  he  was  powerful  only  at  Washington.  He  had 
to  go  to  Cincinnati,  and  Hanna  went  to  Cincinnati.  He 
appealed  from  Bushnell  and  Foraker  to  the  strong  man 


172     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

behind  both  of  them ;  with  Federal  patronage  in  his  hand, 
he  went  to  George  B.  Cox,  the  laconic  boss  of  Cincinnati, 
who,  tradition  has  it,  passed  to  the  Governor  two  words: 
"  Name  Hanna."  And  Hanna  was  named. 

And  thus  it  happened  that  Hanna  first  went  to  Cin- 
cinnati; thus  was  begun,  in  an  emergency,  the  alliance  of 
Hanna,  the  Cleveland  business  man,  with  Cox,  the  Cin- 
cinnati politician — an  alliance  full  of  portent  for  the 
State  of  Ohio.  Hanna  was  building  his  system.  Not  that 
he  knew  it.  Reputed  great  as  an  organizer,  Hanna  worked 
like  a  bird;  all  he  knew  was  that  he  needed  a  straw;  his 
genius  lay  in  the  sure  instinct  with  which  he  found  his 
straw.  The  nest  happened.  Cincinnati  was  a  branch  to 
build  on,  Cox  a  straw.  So  far  as  I  can  make  out,  when 
Hanna  had  his  senatorship,  he  gave  Cox  some  of  the 
President's  patronage  and  flitted  off  to  Washington  satis- 
fied. But  he  had  descended  to  Cincinnati  and  to  Cox,  and 
he  was  to  go  there  again.  Let  us  go  there  and  see  what 
it  means  to  go  to  Cox  and  Cincinnati. 

I  shall  never  forget  my  first  visit.  Cities  and  city  bosses 
were  my  subject  then,  and  I  thought  I  knew  something 
about  such  things.  I  didn't  know  the  worst.  The  train  ran 
through  the  early  morning  sunshine  up  to  a  bank  of  mist 
and  smoke,  paused,  as  every  train  since  has  done,  then 
slowly  tunneled  its  way  into  the  cul  de  sac,  where  the  Queen 
City  broods  in  gloom.  I  wanted  to  see  Cox.  The  etiquette 
of  my  work  seems  to  me  to  require  that  I  shall  call  first 
everywhere  on  the  ruler  of  the  people ;  if  he  is  the  Mayor, 
I  call  first  on  him ;  if  the  mayor  is  a  figurehead,  I  call  first 
on  the  boss.  Sometimes  one  is  in  doubt.  In  Cincinnati, 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        173 

immediately  after  breakfast,  I  sought  out  the  sign  of  the 
"  Mecca "  saloon,  went  up  one  flight  to  a  mean,  little 
front  hall-room.  A  great  hulk  of  a  man  sat  there  alone, 
poring  over  a  newspaper,  with  his  back  to  the  door.  He 
did  not  look  up. 

"  Mr.  Cox?  "  I  said. 

There  was  a  grunt ;  that  was  all. 

"  Mr.  Cox,"  I  said,  "  I  understand  that  you  are  the  boss 
of  Cincinnati." 

His  feet  slowly  moved  his  chair  about,  and  a  stolid  face 
turned  to  mine.  Two  dark,  sharp  eyes  studied  me,  and 
while  they  measured,  I  explained  that  I  was  a  student  of 
"  politics,  corrupt  politics,  and  bosses."  I  repeated  that 
I  had  heard  he  was  the  boss  of  Cincinnati.  "  Are  you?  " 
I  concluded. 

"  I  am,"  he  grumbled  in  his  hoarse,  throaty  voice. 

"  Of  course,  you  have  a  Mayor,  and  a  council,  and 
judges?" 

"  Yes,"  he  admitted ;  "  but "  he  pointed  with  his 

thumb  back  over  his  shoulder  to  the  desk — "  I  have  a 
telephone,  too." 

"  And  you  have  citizens,  too  ?  American  men  and 
women  ?  " 

He  stared  a  moment,  silent,  then  turned  heavily  around 
back  to  his  paper.  Well,  I  feel  the  same  way  now  about 
the  citizenship  of  this  city;  Cox,  their  ruler,  and  I  have 
had  several  talks  since;  he  doesn't  say  much,  but  I  am 
sure  he  and  I  agree  perfectly  about  them.  But  this,  also, 
I  never  forgot,  and  let  no  one  else  forget  it:  Cincinnati  is 
an  American  city,  and  her  citizens  are  American  citizens. 


174     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

Therefore,  what  has  happened  in  Cincinnati  can  happen 
in  American  cities.  What  had  happened  there? 

We  need  not  go  into  details.  We  know  Philadelphia, 
and  that  is  to  know  most  of  the  truth  about  Cincinnati. 
An  aristocracy  once,  the  best  people  were  decent  about  the 
graft,  but  selfish,  and  the  criminal  classes  took  over  the 
government.  Tom  Campbell,  a  criminal  lawyer,  led  the 
Republicans,  and  John  R.  McLean,  the  son  of  "  Wash  " 
McLean,  also  a  sort  of  boss,  led  the  Democrats ;  but  there 
was  no  politics.  The  good  people  knew  parties,  not  the 
party  politicians.  John  R.  McLean  and  Tom  Campbell 
were  great  friends,  and  they  ruled  by  buying  votes  and 
indulging  vice  and  crime.  Campbell  controlled  the  criminal 
bench.  He  defended  criminals,  out  of  the  ring  and  in  it; 
there  was  brawling,  robbery,  murder;  and,  in  open  court, 
over  evidence  which  the  public  was  reading  in  McLean's 
newspaper,  The  Enquirer — over  evidence  which  convinced 
all  but  the  corrupt  judges  and  the  "  fixed  "  juries,  this 
politician-lawyer  got  his  clients  off,  till,  in  1884,  upon  the 
acquittal  of  two  murderers  who  killed  a  man  for  a  very 
small  sum  of  money,  the  town  revolted.  A  mob  burned  the 
criminal  court-house.  The  McLean-Campbell  regime  of 
Cincinnati,  which  corresponded  to  the  Tweed  days  of 
New  York  and  the  McManes-Gas-Ring  rule  of  Phila- 
delphia, closed  with  the  famous  Cincinnati  riots  of  1881. 

Tom  Campbell  moved  to  New  York,  and  McLean  soon 
took  up  a  residence  in  Washington,  D.  C.,  but  "better 
citizens  "  did  not  step  into  their  places.  The  "  best  citi- 
zens "  who  led  the  "  better  citizens  "  were  in  gas  and  other 
public  utilities ;  they  were  "  apathetic,"  so  other  Repub- 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES         175 

lican  grafters  held  down  the  Republican  party  while  Mc- 
Lean, the  Democrat,  with  his  "  independent "  Enquirer 
and  his  contributions,  kept  a  paralyzing  hand  on  the  Demo- 
cratic machine.  Since  McLean  was  "  active  "  only  when 
he  wanted  something  himself  or  when  he  wanted  to  keep 
anybody  else  from  getting  anything,  this  dog-in-the- 
manger  weakened  the  Democracy,  even  as  a  graft 
organization ;  and  gradually  the  "  grand  old  party " 
established  itself.  Among  the  Republican  leaders  of  this 
period  the  only  one  we  need  to  know  is  Joseph  B.  Foraker. 
He  is  the  senior  United  States  Senator  from  Ohio  now,  and 
we  are  asking  what  "  our  "  Senators  represent  at  home. 
Mr.  Foraker  represented  the  Young  Republicans  of  his 
day.  Enthusiastic  over  his  party,  passionate  in  the  defense 
of  the  Union  soldier,  eloquent  upon  the  rights  of  the  people, 
this  young  orator  was  dubbed  the  "  Fire  Alarm,"  because 
of  the  courage  with  which  he  fought  corporate  greed  and 
corruption.  The  people  of  this  country  need,  and  they 
are  forever  looking  for  a  leader  who  is  not  a  boss,  and 
Foraker  is  no  boss.  He  is  a  politician ;  he  must  have  been 
almost  a  demagogue  once ;  certainly  he  raised  the  hopes 
and  won  the  hearts  of  a  majority  of  Ohioans,  for  they 
elected  him  Governor  of  their  State,  twice.  What  did  he 
do  for  these,  his  own  people  ? 

Governor  Foraker  "  discovered  "  Cox.  A  saloon-keeper 
and  councilman  at  the  time,  Cox  ruled  his  own  ward  and 
was  distinguished  in  his  corrupt  city  as  an  honest  poli- 
tician ;  if  there  was  boodle  to  divide  Cox  divided  it  "  on 
the  square,"  and  if  he  gave  his  word,  he  kept  it.  Where- 
fore the  world  of  graft  trusted  Cox.  Governor  Foraker, 


176     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

needing  a  boss  for  Cincinnati,  made  Cox  an  oil  inspector 
and  the  dispenser  of  patronage  in  Hamilton  County  (Cin- 
cinnati). An  oil  inspectorship  in  Ohio  is  "good  money  " 
and,  better  still,  brings  a  man  into  confidential  relations 
with  one  of  the  deep  sources  of  corruption  in  the  State, 
Standard  Oil.  Foraker  and  Cox  soon  got  in  touch  with 
other  such  interests.  There  are  several  instances  to  cite; 
one  will  do. 

A  while  ago  we  spoke  of  the  Rogers  Law.  Cox  and 
Foraker  managed  that.  The  Cincinnati  traction  interests 
wanted  a  fifty-year  five-cent-fare  franchise  in  Cincinnati. 
Foraker  wanted  to  go  to  the  United  States  Senate.  Public 
opinion  out  West  is  against  long  franchises,  but  the  "  Fire 
Alarm  "  expressed  public  opinion.  It  was  charged  in  the 
public  prints  of  Chicago  and  Ohio  that  Foraker  was  paid 
an  enormous  "fee"  (ranging  from  $100,000  to  $250,- 
000)  for  his  services — as  a  lawyer.  He  did  not  sue  for 
libel,  but  he  denied  the  charge;  he  said  all  he  got  was  a 
present  of  $5,000  from  an  officer  of  the  company.  I  say 
it  doesn't  matter  whether  Foraker  took  a  bribe,  or  a  fee, 
or  a  present,  or  nothing  at  all.  His  firm  has  been  ever  since 
counsel  for  the  traction  company,  and  his  son  became  an 
officer  thereof,  but  that  doesn't  matter.  And  it  doesn't 
matter  whether  the  Legislature  that  made  Foraker  a  Sena- 
tor belonged  to  the  company,  or  whether  the  Legislature 
that  passed  the  Rogers  traction  bill  belonged  to  Foraker. 
The  plain,  undeniable,  open  facts  are  that  the  Legislature 
of  1896  which  elected  Foraker  to  the  United  States  Senate 
was  led  by  the  Senator,  a  popular  leader,  to  pass  in  the  in- 
terest of  the  traction  company  a  bill  which  granted  privi- 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        177 

leges  so  unpopular  that  public  opinion  required  a  repeal  in 
the  next  Legislature  of  1898.  In  other  words,  this  man, 
who  by  his  eloquence  won  the  faith  of  his  people,  betrayed 
them  for  some  reason  to  those  interests  which  were  cor- 
rupting the  government  in  order  to  get  privileges  from 
it.  That's  all  any  electors  need  to  know  about  Joseph  B. 
Foraker,  that  and  the  report  that  he  hopes  some  day  to 
be  President  of  the  United  States. 

Let's  turn  to  an  honest  grafter.  Cox  made  the  councils 
of  Cincinnati  act  for  the  traction  company  under  the 
Rogers  Law,  but  he  doesn't  pretend  to  represent  the  peo- 
ple. That  isn't  his  business.  Cox's  business  is  to  rule  the 
people,  and  he  does  it.  Cincinnati  was  enraged,  and  Cin- 
cinnati rose  against  Cox  for  this  act.  Cox  was  for  licking 
them  into  obedience,  but  Hanna  was  back  in  Cincinnati 
again.  Hanna  had  to  be  elected,  in  1898,  to  the  seat  he 
had  been  appointed  to.  He  wanted  "  harmony  "  in  Cin- 
cinnati. He  wanted  Cox  to  hide  and  let  some  business  men, 
such  as  used  to  rule  Cleveland,  run  the  1897  campaign 
which  was  to  elect  his  (Hanna's)  Legislature.  It  was  selfish 
of  Hanna,  but  Cox  was  willing.  He  told  me  about  it. 

"  Wanted  good  men  nominated,"  he  said.  "  Wanted 
business  men.  Wanted  business  men  to  name  the  ticket 
and  run  the  machine.  Come  to  me,  a  committee  of  them, 
bankers  and  all  like  that.  Said  they'd  name  twelve  men, 
and  I  was  to  name  twelve.  I  was  to  pick  six  off  their  list, 
and  they  were  to  pick  six  off  mine.  Showed  me  their  twelve 
and  I  took  'em  all,  all  twelve,  all  business  men,  good  people. 
Called  'em  the  dozen  raw.  Let  'em  name  the  ticket  and 
lent  'em  the  machine  to  run."  He  paused.  "  Who  do  you 


178     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

think  they  nominated?"  he  asked,  and  he  answered: 
"  They  nominated  fellers  they  met  at  lunch." 

Cox's  scorn  of  "  good  business  men  "  reminds  me  of 
Croker.  Croker  has  never  been  able  to  understand  just 
how  "  bad  "  he  was ;  he  really  was  puzzled  as  to  himself. 
"  But,"  he  said  one  day  with  assurance,  "  I  know  I'm 
better  than  them  " ;  and  he  pointed  off  downtown  toward 
Wall  Street,  where  his  business  backers  and  clients  were. 
And  it  is  so  with  Cox.  He  doesn't  understand  the  stand- 
ards of  his  critics,  but  he  knows  he  is  better  than  "  them." 

"  Them,"  in  Cincinnati,  were  beaten.  The  "  dozen  raw  " 
who,  largely  for  Hanna's  sake,  tried  to  give  "  front  "  to 
the  Republican  party,  and  save  it  with  a  respectable  busi- 
ness man's  ticket,  failed.  McLean  wanted  to  go  to  the 
United  States  Senate,  so  he  lent  the  Democratic  machine 
to  the  Democrats,  who  combined  with  the  independents,  and 
together  they  elected  an  anti-machine  ticket.  It  looked 
so  bad  for  Cox  that  he  announced  his  retirement  from 
politics,  but  the  amiable  old  gentleman  who  was  Mayor 
proved  so  weak  and  the  "  Democrats  "  and  "  independ- 
ents "  such  poor  stuff  that  Cox  recovered  his  courage. 
He  bought  some  members  of  the  administration,  fooled 
others,  and  with  the  help  of  these  set  the  rest  to  fighting 
among  themselves.  Cox  so  disgusted  the  town  with  "  re- 
form "  that  it  came  back  to  him,  laid  itself  at  his  feet,  and 
he  proceeded  at  his  leisure  to,  what  a  judge  called,  the 
"  Russianization  "  of  Cincinnati. 

What  that  means  we  shall  see  when  it  is  done.  Hanna 
waits,  his  present  want,  the  senatorship,  unsatisfied.  He 
thought  he  had  it  fixed ;  though  the  McKisson  anti-Hanna 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        179 

Republicans  had  elected  to  the  Legislature  part  of  the 
delegation  from  Cuyahoga  County  (Cleveland),  and  the 
anti-Cox  movement  had  sent  up  independent  Republicans 
from  Hamilton  County  (Cincinnati),  Hanna  and  his  State 
manager,  Major  Charles  F.  Dick,  assumed  that  all  "  Re- 
publicans "  would  be  loyal  to  "  the  party."  Loyalty  to 
party  means,  to  a  boss,  loyalty  to  the  boss.  Now  Hanna 
wasn't  yet  the  boss  of  Ohio,  but  he  wanted  to  be,  so  he 
assumed  that  no  one  would  oppose  him.  The  capital  was 
full  of  his  enemies,  Governor  Bushnell,  Senator  Foraker, 
Mayor  McKisson,  Charles  Kurtz,  etc.,  but  Hanna  flitted 
off  to  Washington,  and  Major  Dick  "  sat  with  his  feet 
up  on  a  table  cracking  jokes." 

Secretly,  those  Republican  enemies  of  Hanna  formed  a 
combination  with  Democrats  to  beat  Hanna.  They  could 
do  it.  They  had  the  votes.  This  they  proved  by  smash- 
ing Hanna's  legislative  slate,  and  Ohio  and  Washington 
were  thrown  into  a  state  of  excited  dismay.  Hanna  flew 
to  Columbus  and  took  personal  charge  of  his  own  fight. 
With  him  came  money,  lots  of  money,  and  with  this  money 
came  the  influence  of  the  President,  of  the  railroads,  the 
banks,  Federal  officeholders.  Mass  meetings  were  organ- 
ized at  the  homes  of  lost  or  doubtful  legislators,  speeches 
were  made,  addresses  drawn,  and  committees  with  petitions 
were  hurled  by  special  trains  to  the  capitol.  Columbus  was 
a  wonderful  scene.  The  hotels  were  packed,  crowds  surged 
up  and  down  the  halls  and  lobbies.  Wine  flowed  and  there 
were  loud  rows  and  fist  fights.  Legislators  were  kidnaped, 
made  drunk,  and  held  prisoners.  The  wife  of  one  member, 
sent  for  because  of  her  influence  over  her  husband,  was 


180     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

held  by  one  side  while  the  other  kept  him  hidden  away  in 
a  room.  Men  carried  revolvers  and  showed  them,  and  wit- 
nesses tell  me  there  was  really  a  fear  of  sudden  death. 
But  under  all  this  money  was  whispering;  both  sides  used 
it.  Hanna  always  denied  that  he  spent  any.  The  anti- 
Hanna  combine  settled  finally  on  McKisson  as  their  candi- 
date, and  McKisson  says  he  hadn't  any  money.  But  these 
are  technical  denials.  I  don't  know  who  handled  the  little 
money  the  McKissonites  had,  but  after  Hanna  won  (for, 
of  course  Hanna  won)  by  one  vote,  specific  charges  of 
bribery  were  made.  A  committee  took  evidence  on  one  case 
and  reported  (1)  that  "  on  or  about  Jan.  9,  1898,  an  at- 
tempt was  made  to  bribe  John  C.  Otis,  a  member  of  the 
House  ...  to  vote  for  Marcus  A.  Hanna";  (2)  "that 
Major  E.  G.  Rathbone  and  Major  Charles  F.  Dick  were 
agents  of  Marcus  A.  Hanna,  and  procured,  aided,  and 
abetted  the  crime." 

The  report,  sent  to  the  United  States  Senate,  was  not 
credited  there,  but  that  means  nothing ;  it  means  no  more 
than  the  report  of  a  board  of  aldermen  would  mean  of  an 
investigation  of  graft  charges  against  some  fellow-mem- 
ber. "  Senatorial  courtesy "  seated  Mr.  Hanna.  But  if 
bribery  ever  was  proved,  it  was  on  that  investigation.  The 
bribe  agent,  now  dead,  was  followed  step  by  step;  he  re- 
ported by  telephone  to  "  Dick,"  "  Major  Dick,"  and  to 
others  at  Hanna's  headquarters  everything  that  he  did; 
and  these  frequent  telephonic  communications  were  over- 
heard by  witnesses,  with  stenographers  by  to  take  them 
down.  Hanna's  declaration  of  personal  innocence  was  borne 
out ;  the  witnesses  said  the  agent  said  he  represented  East- 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        181 

em  men  and  Eastern  money ;  but  "  Dick  "  was  certainly 
Hanna's  State  manager,  and  Hanna  wasn't  the  sort  of 
man  such  a  lieutenant  would  be  afraid  to  report  to  on  the 
use  of  money.  But  waive  all  that. 

Hanna  rewarded  with  offices  in  the  State  and  the  United 
States  service  the  legislators  and  agents  who  "  stood  by 
him."  Hanna  said  on  the  stump  afterward  that  he  did 
this.  That  is  enough.  As  we  have  noted  before,  people 
are  often  incensed  over  cash  bribery,  but  bribery  with 
offices  is  worse ;  to  pay  men  who  betray  us  by  giving  them 
salaries  at  our  cost  in  our  public  service  is  the  worst  form 
of  bribery;  that  is  systematic  corruption;  that  is  the 
System.  For  instance,  Major  E.  G.  Rathbone,  afterward 
involved  in  irregularities  in  the  Cuban  postal  service,  was 
sent  down  there  by  Hanna  because  he  had  proven  his 
character  by  helping  Hanna  in  this  senatorial  fight.  And 
there  are  others :  When  Mark  Hanna  died,  the  System 
decreed  that  Ohio  should  send  his  faithful  lieutenant, 
Major  Dick,  to  the  Senate,  and  thus,  by  the  way,  another 
of  "  our  "  United  States  Senators  is  accounted  for. 

But  never  mind;  Hanna  had  his  senatorship.  There 
remained  unsatisfied  but  one  great  want  of  this  spoiled 
child  of  the  American  business-political  system.  That 
Legislature  of  1898,  which  gave  Hanna  "  so  much  trouble," 
as  he  expressed  it,  repealed  the  Rogers  Law,  and  he  had 
to  begin  all  over  again  to  get  the  extensions  he  wanted  for 
his  street-railway  franchises.  But  he  began  right  this 
time,  at  home.  He  went  to  Cleveland. 

McKisson,  beaten  for  the  senatorship,  was  weakened, 
but  he  controlled  the  Republican  party,  so  Hanna  did 


182     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

what  good  people  are  so  reluctant,  what  the  politicians 
and  bosses  are  so  ready  to  do  when  "  the "  party  fails 
to  represent  them — Hanna  backed  the  other  party.  Yes, 
this  same  Republican  leader  who  had -pleaded  so  hard  for 
"  harmony "  in  Cincinnati  where  harmony  was  in  his 
interest,  now  supported  in  Cleveland  the  Democratic  party. 
The  Democratic  party  in  Ohio  (and  in  many  other  States) 
is  cursed  by  "  Democrats  "  of  the  John  R.  McLean  type, 
who  believe  in  "  protection,"  privileges,  and  big  business 
graft  generally  just  as  much  as  Republicans  of  the  Al- 
drich  stamp  do.  John  Farley  is  such  a  "  Democrat."  I  had 
a  talk  with  him  once,  and  it  was  like  talking  to  Aldrich; 
he  is  candid,  able,  and  a  cynic  about  America  and  its 
democratic  Republic.  Farley  was  nominated  by  the  Dem- 
ocratic Party ;  he  was  called  a  Hanna  Democrat — and  the 
Hanna  Republicans  helped  the  Democrats  elect  him.  And 
he  was  elected  to  help  the  street  railways  get  their 
franchises.  Horace  Andrews  was  out  of  the  "  Big  Con  " 
presidency  and  Henry  Everett  of  the  Everett-Moore  Syn- 
dicate was  in ;  and  the  two  "  Cons "  came  pretty  near 
getting  what  they  wanted.  Farley,  the  Democrat,  stood 
ready  to  do  his  part,  the  traction  people  to  do  theirs ;  but 
the  business  fell  through,  beaten  by — Cleveland,  by  the 
citizens  of  Cleveland. 

Cheerful  idiots  who  think  themselves  optimists  often 
ask  me  why  I  don't  find  something  good  now  and  then, 
somebody  to  praise.  I  do.  I  found  good  in  Chicago;  I 
praised  Folk  and  LaFollette,  A.  R.  Hall,  and  Governor 
Garvin,  and  Oliver  McClintock;  everywhere  I  have  been 
I  have  found  something  good  and  somebody  to  praise. 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        183 

I  notice,  however,  that  while  my  evil  reports  seldom  cause 
resentment,  the  moment  I  begin  to  speak  well  either  of 
men  or  of  conditions,  my  mail  roars  with  rage  and  burns 
with  sarcasm  or  sorrow.  Then  I  am  a  fool  or  a  liar. 
Naturally,  therefore,  it  is  with  fear  and  trembling  that  I 
approach  Cleveland  now.  There  is  something  good  there. 
The  citizens  of  Cleveland  know  how  to  vote;  they  have  a 
public  opinion,  and  they  make  it  count;  they  have  two 
truly  independent  newspapers,  and  this  free  press  speaks 
for  them,  with  effect.  Nominally  Republican,  when  this 
city  had  by  sheer  force  of  public  opinion  stopped  the 
trolley  grabs,  it  turned  around  and  elected  to  succeed 
Farley,  "  Democrat,"  not  a  "  Republican,"  but  Tom  John- 
son, a  Democrat.  Now  this  was  the  most  terrible  disap-: 
pointment  in  the  whole  business-political  career  of  Mr. 
Hanna.  And  Johnson's  administration  has  hurt  "  busi- 
ness "  generally ;  it  is  a  sore  trial  to-day  to  a  certain  kind 
of  business  men  in  Cleveland ;  and  the  results  of  the 
fight  against  this — this  "  socialist-anarchist-nihilist "  (as 
Hanna  called  Johnson)  has  upset  the  charters  of  all  the 
cities  in  Ohio  and  reversed  the  judicial  policy  of  the  State 
courts.  Next  to  the  "  wants  "  of  Mr.  Hanna,  nothing  has 
had  such  an  influence  on  the  politics,  government,  and 
"  business  "  interests  of  Ohio  as  the  policy  of  the  Mayor 
of  Cleveland.  Yet  Cleveland  reflected  Mayor  Johnson. 
There  is  something  good  in  Cleveland  and  Tom  L.  Johnson. 
Good?  It  seems  to  me  that  Tom  Johnson  is  the  best 
Mayor  of  the  best-governed  city  in  the  United  States. 
This  is  no  snap  judgment.  The  first  time  I  went  to  Cleve- 
land, on  the  same  trip  that  took  me  to  Cox  and  Cincinnati, 


184     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

I  knew  all  about  Tom  Johnson.  He  was  a  dangerous 
theorist  with  a  dangerous  ambition;  that  was  the  im- 
pression the  System  had  spread  of  him  in  New  York ;  and 
all  I  had  to  do  was  to  prove  it.  Since,  though  Mayor,  he 
was  the  head  of  the  actual  government  of  the  city,  I 
called  on  him.  His  office  was  full,  and  it  was  a  shock  to 
my  prejudice  to  watch  this  big  jolly  man  do  business — 
attention,  reflection,  and  a  question;  a  decision,  a  laugh; 
next.  And  so  it  went.  But  I  wasn't  to  be  fooled.  When 
my  turn  came,  I  asked  him  what  his  ambition  was?  He 
laughed. 

"  My  ambition,"  he  said  "  is  to  make  Cleveland  the  first 
American  city  to  get  good  government."  That  was  amus- 
ing, and  he  saw  my  skepticism,  and  it  amused  him.  "  And 
not  only  that,"  he  added,  with  a  sober  impulse  of  his  tre- 
mendous energy.  "  I'd  like  to  make  it  not  only  the  first 
to  get  good  government ;  I'd  like  to  make  it  prove  things, 
prove  good  government  possible,  prove  municipal  owner- 
ship possible,  prove  anything  is  possible  that  any  com- 
munity of  American  citizens  cares  to  try  to  do." 

There  was  something  interesting  and  intelligent  about 
that.  I  often  had  wondered  why  all  our  leading  citizens 
sought  the  same  thing,  money-power ;  why  didn't  some  of 
them  pursue  some  other  end;  why  didn't  someone  seek 
the  everlasting  fame  that  would  come  to  the  man  who  first 
should  achieve  good  municipal  government?  But  I  knew 
Johnson  too  well  to  be  taken  in  by  his  "  ambition."  I 
pried  around  a  little.  If  a  city  is  corrupt,  there  are  signs 
of  graft  about  it.  The  pavements  show  it  and  the  police 
on  patrol ;  reporters  and  certain  kinds  of  business  men  will 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        185 

give  you  the  rumors  of  it.  Cleveland  showed  none  of  these 
signs,  so  I  went  away  baffled  to  give  Tom  Johnson  time 
to  show  what  he  was  after.  And,  sure  enough,  the  next 
time  I  visited  Cleveland  the  Mayor  whose  ambition  it  was 
to  give  his  city  good  government  was  running  for  Gov- 
ernor of  Ohio!  Unfortunately  for  my  prejudice,  however, 
my  experience  with  Folk  in  St.  Louis,  with  the  reformers 
in  Chicago,  with  reform  in  all  cities,  had  taught  me  that 
no  man  can  finish  a  municipal  reform  job  without  going 
to  the  State.  Moreover,  I  had  come  to  regard  office-seeking 
as  no  worse  a  crime  in  a  reformer  than  in  a  grafter;  on 
the  contrary  it  had  occurred  to  me  that  one  way  to  beat 
the  grafting  system  was  to  promote  honest  men  for  giving 
good  government,  as  the  System  (Hanna's,  for  instance) 
promotes  corrupt  men  for  corrupting  government.  The 
question  still  was  as  to  the  goodness  of  Tom  Johnson's 
government.  A  year  ago  last  winter,  after  a  month  of 
search,  I  was  convinced  that  there  was  no  graft  worth 
speaking  of  in  Cleveland ;  certainly  if  I  had  tried  to  make 
out  a  case  of  bad  government  against  Tom  Johnson,  I 
should  have  made  myself  ridiculous.  But  how,  in  a  brief 
space,  is  one  to  prove  good  government? 

The  best  department  in  this  best  government  is  that 
of  the  law.  Newton  D.  Baker,  the  head  of  it,  is  clear,  able, 
and,  best  of  all,  fair.  He  has  directed  all  the  many  obnox- 
ious litigations  for  the  city  against  "  business,"  and  yet 
"  business-men  "  who  sneer  at  Johnson  and  all  his  men, 
except  Baker,  because  while  he  fights  for  the  city  he 
"  fights  fair,"  they  say.  But  how  is  this  to  be  shown?  All 
I  can  say  is :  Ask  any  Clevelander  about  Newton  D.  Baker. 


186     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

Mayor  Johnson  wanted  to  make  his  water-works  prove 
that  municipal  operation  was  good.  It  was  a  political 
dive  when  he  was  elected,  and  the  contractors  for  a  water 
tunnel  to  reach  far  out  into  the  lake  had  wrecked  the  job 
at  both  ends  and  given  it  up  as  hopeless.  The  Mayor  ap- 
pointed Professor  Edward  W.  Bemis  superintendent. 
There  was  a  howl  from  the  party,  for  Bemis  hailed  from 
another  State  and  had  no  politics,  but  Johnson  stood  his 
ground  while  the  "  foreigner  "  threw  out  Republicans  and 
Democrats  alike,  Protestants  and  Catholics ;  put  in  men 
without  regard  to  politics ;  reorganized  the  department  on 
a  business  basis;  installed  meters  against  another  outcry ; 
saved  waste ;  reduced  expenses,  to  city  and  consumer  alike, 
and  altogether  established  a  system  that  did  prove  things. 
Furthermore,  the  city  completed  that  water  tunnel.  My 
colleague,  Mr.  Adams,  said  Cleveland  water  was  not  pure, 
but  that  meant  either  that  the  tunnel  should  reach  farther 
out  in  the  lake  or  that  a  filtration  plant  is  needed.  The 
Waterworks  Department  certainly  proves  that  a  man  like 
Bemis,  backed  by  a  man  like  Johnson,  backed  by  a  citizen- 
ship like  Cleveland's,  can  run  its  waterworks  better  than 
a  private  company.  But  this  is  only  my  assertion ;  ask  any 
Clevelander  if  it  isn't  true. 

The  Police  Department  caused  trouble  at  first.  Tom 
Johnson  is  not  interested  in  the  police  as  a  New  York 
reformer  would  be,  but  there  is  but  one  man  in  this  country 
who  has  solved  the  police  problem  more  satisfactorily. 
The  Mayor,  after  some  patient  experiments,  found  on  the 
force  a  junior  officer  who  struck  him  as  honest,  able,  and 
full  of  nerve.  He  made  him  chief  of  police.  That  caused 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        187 

more  bitter  feeling,  for  Chief  Kohler  is  a  Republican. 
Kohler  cared,  Johnson  didn't.  Kohler  declared  he  "  wasn't 
looking  for  trouble "  ^and  didn't  want  the  place.  "  I 
wouldn't  have  given  it  to  you,  if  you  did,"  said  the  Mayor, 
and  he  gave  commands.  Chief  Kohler  obeyed  the  Mayor's 
orders.  There  is  absolutely  no  graft  among  the  Cleveland 
police  that  I  could  find,  and,  without  any  alliance  with 
criminals,  this  young  man  handles  his  criminal  problem. 
Mayor  Johnson  is  a  good  judge  of  men,  and  Cleveland 
has  the  best  chief  of  police  that  I  have  met  so  far. 

One  day  a  builder  stopped  me  in  the  street  to  complain 
about  the  Building  Department.  Certain  plans  had  been 
held  up  for  three  days,  he  said.  That  sounded  like  New 
York.'  "  What  for— graft?  "  I  asked.  "  Oh,  no,"  he  said; 
"  they  excused  the  delay  by  saying  that  the  head  of  the 
department  had  bought  a  pair  of  shoes  that  hurt  his  feet. 
But  the  man  isn't  up  to  his  work,  and  Johnson  won't  do 
anything  about  it."  Think  of  a  complaint  like  that  in 
your  city.  This  builder  was  perfectly  right ;  but  before  I 
left  the  town  he  said  he  and  a  committee  had  gone  to  the 
Mayor,  and  I  happened  to  hear  several  cabinet  discussions 
of  a  rather  thorough-going  reorganization. 

Mr.  Adams  says  the  Health  Department  is  weak,  and 
a  remark  of  the  Mayor  to  me  confirmed  this  criticism,  and, 
perhaps,  explained  the  condition.  Mr.  Johnson  said  he 
never  had  been  able  to  understand  the  workings  of  the 
Health  Department;  he  was  an  ex  officio  member  of  the 
board,  but  couldn't  get  interested  in  its  doings.  He  has  to 
be  interested  to  do  good  work,  and  his  interests  are  pretty 
wide;  but  sanitary  science  marks  one  of  his  limitations. 


188     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

Stealing  is  within  his  limits.  A  paving-brick  combine  that 
interested  him  when  he  came  into  office  was  broken  up  in  a 
clever  way,  and  the  Public  Works  Department  was  turned 
over  to  a  Republican,  W.  J.  Springborn,  who  had  proved 
his  honesty  and  capacity  in  the  city  council.  The  efficiency 
and  correctness  of  Mr.  Springborn  I  never  heard  disputed. 
And  the  kindness  and  humanity  of  Harris  R.  Cooley,  the 
director  of  charities  and  correction,  will  not  be  denied. 
The  really  remarkable  results  achieved  under  this  gentle 
clergyman  at  the  city  prison  and  at  Cleveland's  Boyville, 
a  farm  in  the  country  where  "  bad  boys  "  are  proved  to  be 
the  best  boys  in  the  slums — these  works  certainly  are  of 
good  government.  So  with  the  parks.  The  rich  men  of  the 
city  had  provided,  a  beautiful,  though  broken,  circle  of 
parks,  but  they  were  only  decorative  till  Johnson  threw 
them  open  to  the  public.  He  ordered  away  the  "  Keep  off 
the  grass  "  signs,  and  the  Park  Department,  by  games  and 
competitions  for  prizes,  by  winter  sports  and  summer 
music,  has  taught  the  people  of  Cleveland  to  go  out  and 
use  their  parks.  There  has  been  some  protest  at  this 
policy,  but  a  sight  of  those  parks  in  use  makes  the  oppo- 
sition seem  mean.  Moreover,  the  city  has  established  play- 
grounds, and  skating-rinks  on  public  ground  and  in  va- 
cant private  lots,  and  the  police  say  these  sports  lighten 
police  work  in  their  neighborhood. 

But  this  is  not  a  third  of  the  "  proof  "  I  gathered  of 
good  government  in  Cleveland,  and  it  isn't  the  best  proof, 
either.  The  best  evidence  of  the  "  goodness "  of  this 
government  is  the  spirit  of  the  men  in  it.  They  like  their 
work;  they  like  to  talk  about  their  work;  theirs  is  a  sense 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        189 

of  pride  and  preoccupation  such  as  I  have  never  felt  in 
any  other  American  municipal  government.  The  members 
of  the  administration  are  of  all  classes,  but  they  get 
together,  they  and  their  wives,  and  they  talk  shop,  shop, 
shop.  The  Mayor's  levees  are  the  most  popular.  Every- 
body goes  there,  evenings  and  Sundays,  and  it  is  Cleveland, 
Cleveland,  Cleveland,  till  an  outsider  is  bored  to  death. 
Say  what  you  will,  pick  flaws  as  you  may  and  as  I  could, 
Tom  Johnson  has  proved  what  I  never  heard  him  say  he 
hoped  to  prove:  He  has  proved  that  it  can  be  made  a  joy 
to  serve  one's  city. 

Isn't  this  good?  Isn't  this  what  we  mean  by  "  good 
government "  ?  There  are  men  in  Cleveland,  and  in  Ohio, 
and  in  the  United  States,  who  say  it  is  not  good.  They 
hate  and  they  fear  Tom  Johnson  and  all  his  works.  Why  ? 
They  say  he  is  a  politician.  I  don't  think  he  is,  not  a  good 
one,  but  I  don't  care.  And  neither  do  his  critics  care: 
Hanna  was  a  politician,  and  so  are  Cox  and  Foraker,  and 
Johnson's  critics  do  not  mind  that  in  them.  But  they  say 
he  is  not  sincere,  that  he  does  the  good  he  does  to  serve  his 
own  selfish  ends.  Hanna  did  the  evil  he  did  for  selfish  ends, 
and  Tom  Johnson's  enemies  were  Mark  Hanna's  friends. 
Would  they  ask  if  Hanna  was  sincere,  and  Cox,  and  For- 
aker? But  Johnson  was  a  business  man,  and  his  old  busi- 
ness associates  say  that  while  he  was  in  business  he  was  a 
corrupter  of  politics.  This  is  true.  Mr.  Johnson  denies 
it,  but  let  us  examine  the  facts  and  the  denial. 

Tom  Johnson  was  a  big  business  man ;  there  is  no  deny- 
ing that ;  he  succeeded ;  he  is  rich.  And  his  business  was 
big  business,  street  railways  and  steel.  He  was  in  street 


190     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

railways  before  he  was  twenty-one,  and  he  operated  in 
many  parts  of  the  country,  Indianapolis,  Cleveland,  De- 
troit, Brooklyn.  In  Cleveland  he  measured  himself  with 
Hanna  and  beat  him.  I  said  earlier  in  this  sketch  that 
Hanna  was  our  man  of  brains,  not  mind.  Johnson  has  a 
mind;  his  brain  is  no  mere  muscle;  it  thinks.  He  discov- 
ered at  Indianapolis  a  principle  of  street-railway  opera- 
tion. Most  street-car  lines  run  from  the  business  center  of 
the  city  out  to  the  residence  districts.  They  follow  the 
heavy  traffic,  downtown  to  work  in  the  morning,  uptown 
home  in  the  evening.  Mr.  Johnson  believed  that  if  he  could 
run  a  continuous  line  across  town  he  would  catch  not  only 
the  morning  and  evening  crowds,  but  the  all-day  cross-town 
traffic.  He  did.  This  may  seem  a  simple,  obvious  observa- 
tion, but  as  we  have  noted  so  often,  business  men  are  not 
so  great  as  they  think  they  are,  even  at  business.  They 
are  more  often  smart  and  knowing  than  wise  and  intelli- 
gent, and — well,  it  was  the  application  of  this  simple 
principle  that  enabled  Tom  Johnson  to  come  into  Cleve- 
land on  a  little  jerk-water  horse-car  line  and  go  out  on  the 
"  Big  Con,"  while  Mark  Hanna  was  struggling  behind 
with  his  "  Little  Con." 

But,  because  Hanna  was  so  simply  instinctive,  we  can 
excuse  many  of  his  evil  practices ;  he  didn't  know  any  bet- 
ter. And  because  Tom  Johnson  understands  things,  we 
can  pin  him  to  facts.  What  are  the  facts?  He  says  he 
bought  his  franchises,  not  from  councils,  but  from  private 
and  corporate  owners  of  them.  Yes,  but  he  got  extensions 
and  other  privileges  from  cities.  How?  He  declares  that 
he  never  bribed  anybody,  directly  or  indirectly.  Very 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        191 

well,  but  Mr.  Johnson  says  that  he  contributed  to  cam- 
paign funds,  that  he  contributed  to  the  funds  of  both 
parties  when  he  had  business  to  do,  and  he  admits  that  he 
did  this  to  influence  votes  on  his  business.  And  he  adds, 
with  a  candor  as  honest  as  Hanna's  ever  was,  "  I  under- 
stand now  that  that  is  just  as  corrupt  and  dangerous  as 
cash  bribery."  It  is  worse.  It  is  systematic.  And  Mr. 
Johnson  understands  what  I  mean  by  that.  Mr.  Johnson 
understands  what  perfect  honesty  is.  He  says  Horace 
Andrews  has  it,  and  to  prove  it  he  told  me  once  a  story 
which  illustrates  perfectly  the  difference  between  himself 
and  Hanna  and  Andrews.  Both  street-railway  combina- 
tions wanted  something  from  the  city.  Hanna  went  ahead 
and  bought  it;  the  cost  was  $40,000.  Then  Hanna 
thought  the  "  Big  Con  "  ought  to  pay  its  share,  and  the 
"  Big  Con "  directors,  Johnson  included,  were  willing. 
But  Andrews  refused  absolutely,  as  his  custom  was. 
"  Then,"  said  Mr.  Johnson,  "  I  discovered  that  about 
$20,000  of  that  $40,000  was  for  legitimate  expenses,  so 
I  said  to  Andrews :  '  Here,  Horace,  is  a  way  out  of  this. 
We  can  pay  the  honest  half  of  that  bill  and  let  Hanna 
foot  the  other  half.'  But  Andrews  said  that  that  was  a 
flimsy  subterfuge,  and,  of  course,  he  was  right."  So  I 
concluded  that  while  Mr.  Johnson  had  scruples  unknown 
to  the  Hannas,  he  was  willing  to  do  things  that  Horace 
Andrews  wouldn't  do.  In  brief,  Tom  Johnson,  in  business, 
did  what  was  necessary  to  the  furtherance  of  his  business. 
But  the  men  who  wanted  to  make  Hanna  President,  and 
who  deal  now  with  Cox  and  Foraker,  Murphy  and  Platt 
and  Aldrich — the  clients  and  friends  of  such  as  these 


192     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

cannot  tell  me  that  they  hate  Johnson  for  the  evil  he  may 
have  done  as  a  business  man  in  politics.  There  is  some- 
thing back  of  all  their  charges.  What  is  it?  I  think  we 
are  close  now  to  a  truth  that  we  must  see  plainly  if  we  are 
to  understand  why  our  governments,  city,  State,  and  na- 
tional, are  corrupt,  and,  also,  why  our  reforms  fail  so 
regularly. 

Tom  Johnson  is  the  "  business  man  for  Mayor  "  that 
business  men  have  been  prophesying  so  long  must  come 
along  some  day  to  give  us  a  "  good  business  administra- 
tion of  a  city  government,"  and,  now  that  he  has  come, 
Business  hates  him  because  he  has  given  Cleveland  not 
only  good  government,  but  representative  government; 
not  only  clean  streets,  but  clean  tax  lists ;  he  has  stopped 
not  only  blackmail,  but  bribery ;  he  tackled  not  only  low- 
down  petty  police  and  political  graft,  but  high-toned,  big, 
respectable,  business  graft,  both  legitimate  and  illegiti- 
mate. Tom  Johnson  is  a  reformed  business  man.  His 
reform  began  at  home;  he  reformed  himself  first,  then  he 
undertook  political  reform ;  and  his  political  reform  began 
with  the  reform  of  his  own  class.  And  that  is  Tom  John- 
son's sin. 

One  day,  at  the  height  of  his  money-making  career, 
the  newsboy  on  a  train  offered  him  a  copy  of  Henry 
George's  "  Social  Problems."  He  was  pushing  it  away, 
when  the  conductor,  happening  to  pass,  said :  "  That's  a 
book  you  ought  to  read,  Mr.  Johnson."  So  he  took  it, 
read  it ;  it  threw  a  flood  of  light,  especially  upon  his  busi- 
ness ;  and  he  read  more  of  Henry  George,  met  the  man, 
became  a  disciple,  and  managed  one  of  the  great  Single- 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES         193 

Taxer's  political  campaigns.  Convinced  of  the  injustice 
of  privileges,  Mr.  Johnson  did  not  quit  turning  privileges 
into  money;  he  was  twitted  on  the  point  while  he  was  a 
member  of  Congress  in  1891 ;  and  his  answer  shows  how  he 
excused  himself.  Mr.  Johnson  moved  that  the  duty  on 
steel  rails  be  removed.  Mr.  Dalzell,  the  Republican  leader, 
interrupted  Johnson  to  ask  him  if  he,  a  manufacturer  of 
steel  rails,  was  not  a  beneficiary  of  the  duty  on  them. 
Johnson  said  he  was ;  that  he  got  a  higher  price  for  his 
rails  because  of  that  duty ;  but  that,  as  a  member  of  Con- 
gress, he  represented  not  himself,  nor  his  mill,  nor  his 
stockholders,  but  his  constituents ;  and  that  as  a  free 
trader  he  wished  to  commence  his  reforms  along  the  line 
in  which  he  was  interested.  So  he  continued  his  motion  to 
put  steel  rails  on  the  free  list.  In  other  words  his  position 
was  that,  while  as  a  business  man  he  would  take  advantage 
of  the  favoritism  of  his  government,  as  a  citizen  and  as  a 
politician  he  would  fight  all  privileges  as  economically 
unjust.  Another  amusing  incident  occurred  at  Detroit. 
As  the  manager  of  the  street-car  system,  Johnson  was 
seeking  from  the  city  a  double-track  privilege.  Mayor 
Pingree  was  against  the  grant,  "  but,"  said  Mr.  Johnson, 
"  Pingree  didn't  know  why ;  he  came  to  me  and  said  he 
knew  there  was  something  the  matter  with  the  ordinance, 
and  wouldn't  I  tell  him  what  it  was  that  was  wrong?  I 
laughed.  I  said  I  wouldn't  tell  him  what  he  wanted  to 
know,  but  I  would  tell  him  this  much :  '  If,'  I  said,  *  I  had 
the  say  for  the  city  in  this  thing,  I'd  see  Tom  Johnson  in 
hell  before  I'd  let  him  have  it.' '  When  the  hearing  was 
held,  Pingree  couldn't  make  his  position  very  clear;  he 


194     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

tried  to,  hesitated,  and  then  he  blurted  out  that  he  didn't 
understand  the  ordinance,  but  he  pointed  at  Johnson  and 
he  said :  "  But  I  can  tell  you  this.  Tom  Johnson  there 
told  me  that  if  he  was  in  our  places  he'd  see  Tom  Johnson 
in  hell  before  he'd  grant  it."  Everybody  looked  at  John- 
son, who  laughed  heartily.  "  Yes,  I  did  say  that,"  he 
admitted,  "  but  it  is  a  dirty  trick  to  tell  it  on  me." 

So  he  knew  what  he  was  about  in  business,  but  he  kept 
at  it  till  he  had  made  his  money.  Then,  when  some  men 
go  in  for  yachting,  or  the  Senate,  and  give  money  to 
charity  and  churches,  colleges  and  libraries,  Tom  Johnson 
gave  himself  and  his  money  to  politics,  to  municipal  re- 
form as  the  Mayor  of  Cleveland.  And  as  a  Mayor  he  knew 
what  he  was  about. 

His  platform  as  a  candidate  was  equal  taxation  and 
"  three-cent  fares  with  universal  transfers  "  on  the  street 
railways ;  "  good  "  government  was  a  side  issue ;  he  threw 
that  in.  His  idea  was  to  make  that  city  government  repre- 
sent and  serve  all  its  people.  That  doesn't  sound  bad,  but 
applied  by  an  expert  big  business  man,  who  knew  just 
where  the  System  lay  and  who  reached  for  it  with  ability 
and  humor,  Mayor  Johnson's  simple  idea  had  mixed  and 
terrible  consequences. 

His  first  move  was  at  the  inequalities  and  favoritism 
of  the  tax  lists.  He  had  Peter  Witt  organize  a  Tax 
School.  Peter  Witt  loved  the  work.  It  consisted  in  finding 
out  the  assessments  of  real  estate,  block  by  block,  or  ward 
by  ward.  Great  maps  were  made,  and  on  these  each  piece 
of  property  was  plotted,  and  in  each  plot  Peter  Witt 
wrote  the  assessment  on  it.  You  can  imagine  the  result. 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES         195 

But  when  this  was  done,  Peter  Witt  asked  all  the  property 
owners  to  come  together  to  see  that  result,  and  you  can 
imagine  the  effect  of  this  "  first  view."  There  were  ine- 
qualities, and,  with  the  property  owners  by  to  agree,  they 
were  straightened  out  against  the  next  year.  Now  wasn't 
that  a  good  thing  to  do?  No.  The  System  got  out  an 
injunction  and  stopped  the  "  unlawful "  expenditures  on 
the  Tax  School. 

The  next  reach,  at  about  the  same  time,  was  for  the 
undervaluation  of  steam  railroads.  Now  the  railroads  in 
Ohio  had  long  since  got  through  corrupting  the  State. 
As  we  have  seen  everywhere,  when  the  railroads  have  had  all 
they  want  out  of  the  State  in  the  way  of  privileges  they 
keep  up  only  enough  steam  to  keep  the  government  cor- 
rupt. They  are  there,  though  you  can't  always  see  them. 
Mayor  Johnson  could  see  them.  He,  Professor  Bemis 
and,  later,  Carl  Nau,  an  expert  accountant,  produced 
figures  showing  the  gross  and  ridiculous  undervalua- 
tion of  railroad  property  as  compared  with  other 
property  in  the  State  and  with  railroad  property  in  other 
States.  These  figures,  laid  before  the  auditors  by  the 
Mayor  and  his  assistant,  produced  no  results.  Railroads 
owned  the  boards.  Detectives  who  shadowed  the  audi- 
tors found  that  all  the  auditors  traveled  on  passes  and 
wined  and  dined  with  the  railway  counsel.  Mr.  Johnson 
appealed  from  the  local  to  the  State  Board  of  Equali- 
zation, but  that  board  also  refused  to  act.  Mayor  John- 
son appealed  next  to  the  Supreme  Court  to  compel  the 
State  board  to  act;  the  court  held  that  the  Legislature 
alone  could  remedy  the  evil.  Mayor  Johnson  went  to  the 


196     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

Legislature  of  1902,  and  the  Legislature  adjourned  with- 
out action.  It  was  not  till  1903  that  the  State  tax  on 
railroads  was  increased  from  one-half  of  one  to  one  per 
cent,  on  the  gross  receipts,  just  about  doubling  the  tax, 
and  then  only  with  railroad  consent  and  in  fear  of  "  social- 
istic "  agitation. 

Another  simultaneous  move  was  "  against  "  the  local  pub- 
lic utilities  companies.  The  Mayor  appoints  the  City  Board 
of  Equalization;  and  Johnson's  board  added  $18,000,000 
to  the  tax  valuation  of  the  street-railway  and  lighting 
companies.  Now  it  was  the  System's  turn  to  appeal.  They 
went  to  the  State  auditor,  and  they  did  not  go  in  vain. 
The  State  Board  of  Tax  Remission  remitted,  without  any 
given  reason,  the  entire  increase,  and  the  Legislature 
empowered  the  Republican  county  auditor  of  Cuyahoga 
County  (Cleveland)  to  destroy  the  City  Board.  Johnson 
appealed  to  the  Common  Pleas  Court  to  restore  his  board's 
valuation ;  denied ;  to  the  Circuit  Court ;  denied.  Mean- 
while, however,  the  citizens  were  interested,  and  they 
elected  Robert  C.  Wright  (Dem.)  county  auditor  over 
Craig  (Rep.).  Now  the  biggest  item  in  this  fight  was  a 
claim  by  Johnson  for  $2,000,000  back  taxes  from  the 
public  service  corporations,  and  Wright  was  to  collect  it. 
When  he  entered  his  office  he  found  Craig  had  settled 
secretly  with  the  companies  for  $113,000.  And  when 
Wright  began  to  investigate  the  returns  the  State  auditor 
ordered  him  off.  Wright  proceeded,  nevertheless ;  he  added 
back  values  amounting  to  $1,858,000;  the  State  board 
remitted  them,  and  the  case  was  taken  into  court,  where 
it  still  is  pending.  As  in  the  case  of  the  railroads,  in  spite 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        197 

of  this  succession  of  defeats,  the  public  service  people 
have  consented  to  increased  assessments  from  $3,520,245, 
in  1900,  to  $7,814,120,  in  1904. 

All  these,  however,  were  mere  skirmishes  around  the 
great  central  fight  which  raged  over  "  three-cent  fares 
and  universal  transfers."  The  street  railways  wouldn't 
hear  of  it.  Horace  Andrews  said  they  couldn't  live ;  John- 
son said  they  could ;  Hanna,  who  had  been  calling  Johnson 
a  socialist,  now  added  "  anarchist-nihilist."  I  believe 
Horace  Andrews  has  proved  to  Johnson  since  that  uni- 
versal transfers  are  not  practicable  in  so  large  a  city, 
but  the  Mayor  still  believes  in  three-cent  fares,  and  when 
the  railways  showed  no  disposition  to  budge,  he  and  the 
city  council  established  routes  for  competing  three-cent 
lines  and,  advertising  for  bids,  induced  street-railway  men 
from  out  of  town  to  bid.  Now,  business  men  apply  such 
methods  to  one  another,  and  they  are  all  right  then ;  but. 
when  this  ex-street-railway  magnate  used  them  in  the  inter- 
est of  a  city,  Big  Business  went  mad.  The  first  move 
was  made  by  Johnson  on  December  9,  1901.  Two  days 
later,  the  State  System,  through  Attorney  General  Sheets, 
brought  an  ouster  suit  against  the  City  of  Cleveland,  a 
suit,  that  is,  to  oust  the  whole  administration.  This  sounds 
"  socialistic-anarchistic-nihilistic,"  but  it  wasn't ;  it  was 
Systematic.  There  was  a  run  on  Hanna's  "  Savings 
Bank,"  as  he  called  his  street  railway,  and  something  had 
to  be  done  to  save  it.  And  something  was  done.  On  June 
26  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  State  of  Ohio  ousted  the 
Board  of  Control  of  Cleveland.  Why?  It  had  been  cre- 
ated by  special  legislation.  But  all  the  charters  of  all  the 


198     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

cities  in  Ohio  were  creations  of  special  legislation,  and 
the  same  court  had  upheld  such  special  legislation  from 
time  immemorial.  No  matter.  Special  legislation  was  un- 
constitutional;  the  Supreme  Court  would  have  to  reverse 
itself  some  time,  and  what  was  a  better  time  than  now, 
when  a  Big  Business  man  was  running  a  city  on  Big  Busi- 
ness lines?  But  by  this  decision  all  the  city  charters  of  all 
the  cities  in  the  State  would  fall.  No  matter.  That  court,  to 
check  Tom  Johnson  and  help  the  Hannas,  did  declare  un- 
constitutional all  the  city  charters  in  Ohio.  Oh,  it  was  ar- 
ranged so  that  the  cities  could  do  business,  all  but  one ;  but 
that  exception  points  the  whole  purpose  of  this  supreme 
act  of  the  corrupt,  misrepresentative  system  that  rules 
the  United  States  to-day.  The  exception  was  Cleveland ; 
Cleveland  could  not  grant,  or  consider  granting,  any  more 
franchises. 

But  "  they  "  were  not  through,  not  yet.  Having  torn 
down,  they — and  by  "  they  "  I  mean  the  Hannas,  the  pub- 
lic-service corporations  and  their  political  machinery, 
their  banks  and  their  courts — they  had  to  build  up  some- 
thing in  the  place  of  the  ruin.  They  had  to  pass  a  general 
act  giving  one  and  the  same  city  charter  to  all  the  cities 
in  Ohio.  Where  did  they  go  for  a  model?  They  went  to 
Cincinnati. 

Let's  run  down  there  again  to  see  what  Cox  has  done 
since  1898  to  make  Cincinnati  the  model  Ohio  city.  He 
has  "Russianized"  it.  His  voting  subjects  are  all  down 
on  a  card  catalogue,  they  and  their  children  and  all  their 
business,  and  he  lets  them  know  it.  The  Democratic  Party 
is  gone.  Cox  has  all  the  patronage,  city,  county,  State 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        199 

and  federal,  so  the  Democratic  grafters  are  in  Cox's  Re- 
publican Club.  That  club  contains  so  many  former  Demo- 
crats that  "  Lewie  "  Bernard,  John  R.  McLean's  political 
agent,  says,  happily,  that  he  is  waiting  for  a  majority,  to 
turn  it  into  a  Democratic  club.  And  "  Lewie  "  Bernard's 
machine  remnant  is  in  touch  with  Cox  when  "  John,"  as 
Cox  calls  McLean,  doesn't  want  anything,  either  office  or 
revenge.  Conventions  are  held,  and  Cox  plans  them  in 
detail.  If  he  has  been  hearing  mutterings  among  his  peo- 
ple about  the  boss,  he  is  very  ostentatious  in  dictation ; 
otherwise  he  sits  in  his  favorite  beer  hall  and  sends  in  to 
those  of  his  delegates  whom  he  wishes  to  honor  slips  con- 
taining the  motions  and  nominations  each  is  to  make.  But 
there  must  be  no  nominating  speeches.  "  Takes  time ;  all 
foolishness ;  obey  orders  and  get  done."  He  picks  ward 
leaders,  and  they  deliver  the  votes.  The  citizens  have  no 
choice  of  parties,  but  they  must  get  out  and  vote.  Cox 
is  good  to  some  of  them.  If  they  knuckle  under,  he  puts 
respectable  men  up  for  the  school  board.  He  has  little 
use  for  schools ;  not  much  graft  in  them ;  except  to  cut 
down  their  appropriations  in  favor  of  fatter  departments, 
and  as  a  place  to  try  respectable  men.  If  these  take  orders 
on  the  school  board,  Cox  tries  them  higher  up,  and  he  has 
a-plenty.  The  press  is  not  free.  The  Post  and  the  Citizens9 
Bulletin,  the  last  a  weekly  organ  of  the  smallest  but  one 
of  the  most  enduring  groups  of  reformers  in  America — 
these  are  the  only  papers  that  speak  out  honestly  for  the 
public  interest.  Official  advertising,  offices  for  the  editors, 
public-service  stock  and  political  prospects  for  the  own- 
ers, hold  down  the  rest.  It  is  terrible.  The  city  is  all  one 


200     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

great  graft;  Cox's  System  is  the  most  perfect  thing  of 
the  kind  in  this  country,  and  he  is  proud  of  it. 

"  What  you  think  of  it  ?  "  he  asked,  when  I  had  finished 
and  was  taking  leave. 

"  Pretty  good,"  I  said. 

"  Pretty !  "  He  was  too  disgusted  to  finish.  "  Best 

you  ever  saw,"  he  retorted,  firmly. 

"  Well,  I  can't  tell,"  I  said.  "  My  criterion  for  a  graft 
organization  is,  How  few  divide  the  graft.  Plow  many 
divide  it  here?  " 

"  Ain't  no  graft,"  he  grumbled. 

"  Then  it's  a  mighty  poor  thing." 

He  pondered  a  moment.  Then,  "  How  many  do  you  say 
divides  up  here?  " 

"  Three  at  least,"  I  said.  "  You  and  Garry  Herman  and 
Rud  Hynicka." 

"  Ugh ! "  he  grunted,  scornfully,  and,  wagging  one  fin- 
ger slowly  before  my  face,  he  said :  "  There's  only  one 
divides  up  here." 

Of  course,  that  isn't  true.  He  must  mean  only  political 
graft,  the  campaign  fund,  police  blackmail,  contracts,  etc., 
etc.,  and  even  that  goes  partly  to  others.  Cox  admits  own- 
ing two  millions,  but  some  of  his  followers  are  very  rich 
also.  Cox  wouldn't  lie  about  a  point  like  that;  but  he  is 
growing  vain  and  hates  to  see  other  men  stand  up  like  men 
and  to  hear  them  admired.  They  tell  how  once,  in  a  beer 
hall,  when  Herman  and  Hynicka,  his  two  chief  lieutenants, 
and  some  others,  were  talking  to  some  outsiders  quite  like 
free,  independent  men,  Cox,  who  had  been  poring  over  his 
beer,  broke  in  hoarsely,  "  But  when  I  whistle,  you  dogs 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        201 

come  out  of  your  holes,  don't  you?"  They  were  still. 
"Don't  you,  Garry?"  the  master  repeated.  "That's 
right,"  said  Garry. 

But  there  is  lots  of  graft  besides  political  graft  in  Cin- 
cinnati, bankers'  and  business  men's  graft.  Cox  is  reaching 
for  that,  too.  Some  Cleveland  and  Cincinnati  financiers 
organized  a  trust  company  in  Cincinnati,  and  they  took 
Cox  in  for  his  pull  and  the  public  moneys  he  could  have 
deposited  there.  A  quarrel  arose,  and  Cox,  taking  one  side, 
told  the  others  to  buy  or  sell.  They  sold,  of  course,  and 
Cox,  becoming  president,  wrote  a  letter  to  officeholders, 
inviting  them  to  use  his  bank ;  the  letter  to  school  teachers 
was  published.  Certain  financiers  of  Cleveland  and  Cin- 
cinnati got  up  a  scheme  to  take  over  the  Miami  and  Erie 
Canal.  They  gave  Cox  stock  for  Cox's  pull  on  the  Legisla- 
ture, and  his  letter  to  the  legislators  was  published.  The 
bill  was  beaten ;  business  men  all  along  the  canal  were 
grafting  the  water  for  power,  and  they  fought  for  their 
graft.  The  company  had  floated  its  stock  and  bonds,  and 
the  failure  of  the  Legislature  threw  the  "  canal  scandal " 
into  a  receivership.  Some  of  the  financiers  are  in  trouble, 
but  Cox  is  safe,  and  the  scheme  was  to  go  through  next 
year.  Cox  was  in  the  scheme  to  sell  or  "  lease  "  the  Cin- 
cinnati Southern,  the  only  steam  railroad  under  municipal 
ownership.  Leading  citizens  of  Cincinnati  concocted  this 
grab,  but  the  Germans  beat  it ;  and,  though  it  went  through 
later,  the  city  got  much  better  terms. 

So,  when  Cox  says  only  one  divides  the  graft  in  Cin- 
cinnati he  probably  means  that  one  man  can  dispose  as  he 
will  of  all  of  it,  police,  political,  and  financial,  as  the 


202     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

examples  cited  indicate,  but  he  has  to  let  all  sorts  of  men 
in  on  it.  And  he  does.  And  that  is  his  best  hold  on  the 
graft.  They  talk  in  Cincinnati,  as  they  do  in  Philadelphia, 
of  apathy.  Apathy !  Apathy  is  corruption.  Cincinnati 
and  Philadelphia  are  not  asleep;  they  are  awake,  alive. 
The  life  is  like  that  in  a  dead  horse,  but  it  is  busy  and  it  is 
contented.  If  the  commanding  men,  of  all  the  natural 
groupings  of  society,  were  not  interested  in  graft,  no  city 
would  put  up  with  what  satisfies  Cincinnati.  For  Cincinnati 
is  not  unhappy.  Men  like  Elliot  H.  Pendleton,  Rufus  B. 
Smith,  and  a  dozen  others,  are  eating  their  hearts  out  with 

impotent  rage,  but  as  for  the  rest 

The  rest  are  in  it  for  profit  or — fear.  The  bums  get 
free  soup ;  the  petty  criminals  "  get  off  "  in  court ;  the 
plain  people  or  their  relatives  get  jobs  or  a  picnic  or  a 
friendly  greeting;  the  Germans  get  their  beer  whenever 
they  want  it;  the  neighborhood  and  ward  leaders  get 
offices  and  graft ;  "  good  "  Democrats  get  their  share  of 
both ;  shopkeepers  sell  to  the  city  or  to  politicians  or  they 
break  petty  ordinances ;  the  lawyers  get  cases,  and  they 
tell  me  that  the  reputation  of  the  bench  is  such  that  clients 
seek  lawyers  for  their  standing,  not  at  the  bar,  but  with 
the  ring;  the  banks  get  public  deposits  and  license  to  do 
business;  the  public  utility  companies  get  franchises  and 
"  no  regulation  " ;  financiers  get  canals  etc.,  they  "  get 
blackmailed,"  too,  but  they  can  do  "  business  "  by  "  divid- 
ing up  " ;  property  owners  get  low  assessments,  or  high ; 
anybody  can  get  anything  in  reason,  by  standing  in.  And 
anybody  who  doesn't  "  stand  in,"  or  "  stand  by,"  gets 
"  nothing  but  trouble."  And  there  is  the  point  that  pricks 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        203 

deepest  in  Cincinnati.  Cox  can  punish;  he  does  punish, 
not  with  physical  cruelty,  as  a  Czar  may,  but  by  petty 
annoyances  and  "  trouble,"  and  political  and  business 
ostracism.  The  reign  of  Cox  is  a  reign  of  fear.  The  expe- 
rience that  made  my  visits  there  a  personal  humiliation 
was  the  spectacle  I  saw  of  men  who  were  being  punished ; 
who  wanted  to  cry  out;  who  sent  for  me  to  tell  me  facts 
that  they  knew  and  suffered  and  hated;  and  these  men, 
after  leading  me  into  their  back  offices  and  closing  the 
door,  dared  not  speak.  It  was  rumored  that  I  was 
shadowed,  and  that  made  them  afraid.  Afraid  of  what? 
They  were  afraid  of  their  government,  of  their  Czar,  of 
George  Cox,  who  is  not  afraid  of  them,  or  of  you,  or  of  me. 
Cox  is  a  man,  we  are  American  citizens,  and  Cincinnati 
has  proved  to  Cox  that  Americans  can  be  reduced  to  craven 
cowards. 

And  Ohio  proves  that  the  kind  of  men  that  rule  us  would 
be  willing  to  see  us  all  Russianized  like  this.  When,  in  the 
fall  of  1902,  the  Legislature  of  Ohio  met  in  special  session 
to  adopt  one  uniform  municipal  code  for  all  the  cities  of 
the  State,  the  men  who  dominated  that  State  and  its  Legis- 
lature— Hanna,  Foraker,  Cox,  Dick,  and  the  rest — sent  to 
Cincinnati  for  their  bill.  Now,  I  don't  believe  that  charters 
make  governments  good  or  bad ;  I  believe  the  character  of 
the  people  of  Cincinnati  makes  Cincinnati  what  it  is ;  and 
I  believe  the  citizenship  of  Cleveland  makes  Cleveland  what 
it  is.  But  the  Federal  plan  of  concentrated  power  and 
responsibility,  on  which  the  charter  of  Cleveland  was 
drawn,  helped  her  citizens  to  rule  themselves,  and  the  so- 
called  board  plan  of  scattered  irresponsibility  which  has 


204     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

been  built  up  in  Cincinnati  helped  Cox  to  rule  Cincinnati. 
At  any  rate,  the  citizens  of  each  place  think  so,  and  so 
do  the  grafters,  big  and  little.  And,  with  the  citizens  of 
both  these  cities  and  of  the  other  cities  protesting,  the  big 
grafters  who  ruled  Ohio  took  from  Cox's  men,  who  drew 
it,  a  code  modeled  on  the  Cincinnati  board  plan ;  and  they 
made  their  Legislature  adopt  it  for  Cleveland  and  Ohio ! 

For  the  Cleveland  of  Tom  Johnson  and  the  Ohio  of 
Hanna.  What  does  it  all  mean?  It  means  what  Hanna 
means.  Hanna  is  dead,  but  the  spirit  of  Hanna  lives. 
What  does  Hanna  mean?  Unless  I  have  failed  to  do  that 
man  full  justice,  I  have  shown  that  Hanna  meant  no  evil. 
He  was  not  a  bad  man.  He  was  the  kind  of  American  we  all 
like,  the  kind  that,  wanting  something,  goes  after  it,  fight- 
ing, destroying,  hurting  other  men,  and,  if  necessary,  cor- 
rupting and  undermining  the  government  and  American 
institutions,  but — winning.  They  do  not  mean  to  do  harm. 
Hanna  did  not  mean  to  injure  the  government.  When  he 
attended  that  special  session  he  was  there  not  to  make  the 
men  of  Cleveland  what  the  men  of  Cincinnati  are,  not  to 
make  the  government  of  Cleveland  as  bad  as  the  govern- 
ment of  Cincinnati.  He  wanted  a  street-railway  franchise ; 
the  Cleveland  of  Tom  Johnson  wouldn't  give  him  one.  He 
tried  to  get  one  from  that  special  session;  his  control  was 
so  absolute  that  his  friends  say  they  had  a  hard  time 
making  the  old  man  understand  why  a  special  Legislature, 
called  for  another  purpose,  could  not  give  him  a  perpetual 
grant  to  the  streets  in  Cleveland!  No,  Hanna  saw  only 
that  down  in  Cincinnati  a  business  man  who  wanted  a  fran- 
chise could  have  one;  he  might  have  to  pay  Cox,  but  he 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        205 

would  get  what  he  wanted  in  his  business.  People  called 
Cox  a  boss,  but  what  of  that  ?  He  wasn't  a  "  socialist- 
anarchist-nihilist  "  like  Tom  Johnson.  Mark  Hanna  was  a 
good  man  spoiled  by  the  privileges  our  government  let  him 
steal;  he  came  to  think  that,  not  only  his  franchises  were 
his  very  own  private  property,  but  our  government,  also. 

Now,  is  it  clear  why  Mayor  Johnson  came  to  run  for 
Governor  of  Ohio?  He  had  to.  The  System,  beaten  in 
Cleveland,  had  retreated  to  the  State,  and  there,  with  its 
Legislature,  its  courts,  and  its  other  cities,  it  was  prepar- 
ing to  crush  him  and  conquer  Cleveland.  Hanna,  Cox,  and 
the  Cox-McLean  Cincinnati  "  Democrats  "  beat  Johnson 
that  time.  They  elected  a  "  good "  banker,  Myron  T. 
Herrick.  Poor  Governor  Herrick !  I  saw  him  soon  after  he 
entered  office.  He  is  affable,  but  weak;  everybody  spoke 
well  of  him  then,  and  he  would  have  done  very  well,  but 
they  gave  him  the  veto,  and  then  his  boss  died.  Banker- 
fashion,  he  tried  to  please  everybody,  made  incompatible 
promises,  tried  to  escape,  but  was  caught  naked  in  his 
weakness,  and  now  everybody  is  too  hard  on  him — except 
the  System.  The  System  leaders  make  a  wry  face,  but 
they  found  him  "  safe."  He  carried  out  a  bargain  Hanna 
had  made  with  the  brewers.  Without  knowing  that  there 
was  a  System,  he  signed  a  bill  to  transfer  city  elections 
from  the  spring  to  the  fall;  after  telling  me  that  he  be- 
lieved the  Cleveland  School  System  was  the  best  in  the 
country,  he  signed,  against  the  protest  of  all  the  earnest 
educators  in  the  State,  a  bill  which  put  upon  Cleveland 
and  all  the  other  cities  Cincinnati's  plan,  modified  a  little, 
but  making  possible  a  big,  irresponsible  board.  Herrick 


206     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

was  to  be  renominated,  therefore,  and  he  may  be  reflected. 
The  System  has  a  strong  hold  on  Ohio.  "  We  have  the 
farmers  always,"  said  one  of  its  leaders.  But  Ohio  will 
escape. 

The  signs  of  promise?  The  boss  is  dead,  the  throne  is 
empty,  and  there  is  no  heir  in  sight.  The  people  are  begin- 
ning to  see  things.  Even  in  Cincinnati  (Cox  scoffed  when 
I  told  him  so)  there  is  some  discontent,  and  the  nucleus  of 
veteran  reformers  are  finding  recruits  willing  to  line  up 
against  Cox,  "  just  Cox,"  for  a  fight,  not  to  throw  out  the 
slot  machines,  not  to  ameliorate  particular  evils,  but  to 
restore  representative  government  and  be  free,  wholly  free. 
Dayton  is  bad  and  glad  of  it ;  "  we  hope  to  be  as  '  good ' 
as  Cincinnati  some  day,"  one  of  its  rulers  told  me.  Southern 
Ohio  is  pretty  low.  But  the  spirit  of  the  late  Mayor  Jones 
lives  in  Toledo,  and  though  its  citizens  have  to  present 
"  petitions  in  boots  "  to  get  it,  they  do  get  representative 
government.  And  in  Cleveland  we  have,  as  I  write,  this 
spectacle :  Two  street-railway  men,  Mayor  Johnson,  repre- 
senting the  city,  President  Andrews  for  his  stockholders, 
negotiating  in  public  for  the  disposition  of  the  street-rail- 
way system.  There  is  no  excitement,  no  bad  feeling,  no 
suspicion  of  boodle  or  corruption.  Some  franchises  have 
expired,  others  are  falling  in ;  all  must  be  renewed.  Mayor 
Johnson  opposes  any  renewal  except  upon  terms  which  will 
bring  to  the  city  two  things:  First,  the  removal  of  the 
street  railways  out  of  politics ;  second,  the  benefit,  in  the 
form  of  reduced  fares,  improved  service,  or  profits,  of  all 
that  increase  of  earnings  which  will  come  with  the  natural 
growth  of  the  city.  Mr.  Andrews  says  this  is  fair,  so  it  is 


OHIO:    A    TALE    OF    TWO    CITIES        207 

all  a  question  of  terms.  Mr.  Andrews  wants  par  for  his 
stock.  Mr.  Johnson  points  to  the  market  price,  78,  and 
offers  more — to  be  fair.  But  he  will  not  close  a  deal  with- 
out a  vote  of  the  people. 

"  And  they  will  be  fair,"  Mayor  Johnson  told  me,  and 
Mr.  Andrews  said :  "  Oh,  they  will  be  fair." 

So  the  cynics  lie  who  say  that  capital  has  to  corrupt  a 
democratic  government  to  get  a  "  square  deal "  from  the 
people.  Such  men  as  Horace  Andrews,  an  honest  conserva- 
tive, and  Tom  Johnson,  a  patient  liberal,  could  settle 
Cleveland's  street-railway  problem,  they  and  the  people 
they  both  trust.  But  will  they?  Their  spirit  would  settle 
all  our  political  problems.  But  will  it?  See  now  the 
other  side  of  the  picture:  Back  of  Johnson  lurk  the  red 
radicals,  sneering,  eager  to  throw  a  brick;  and  back  of 
Andrews  sneaks  his  big  stockholder,  who  also  sneers,  and, 
like  the  anarchist  that  he  is,  stands  ready  to  throw — a 
bribe.  And  this  other  spirit,  the  spirit  of  the  Hannas,  who 
cried  "  down  with  the  nihilist-anarchist-socialist,"  and 
annihilating  all  city  charters,  waded  through  municipal 
anarchy  to  the  class  socialism  of  Cincinnati,  this  same 
spirit  was  corrupting  councilmen  in  the  interest  of  the 
lighting  company  while  I  was  in  Cleveland,  and  it  was 
holding  at  the  State  capital  a  bill  to  take  away  from  the 
cities,  and  give  to  a  State  board,  the  power  to  deal  with  all 
the  franchise  questions  in  Ohio,  State  and  country,  too. 

The  forces  of  evil,  beaten  in  the  city,  hold  the  State. 
The  forces  of  good,  winning  in  Cleveland,  fighting  in 
Toledo,  hopeful  in  Cincinnati,  to  hold  their  own,  must  carry 
Ohio.  Ohio — the  whole  State — has  to  make  the  choice,  the 


208     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

choice  we  all  have  to  make:  Cleveland  or  Cincinnati.  The 
Herricks  and  Dicks  and  false  "  Fire  Alarms  "  won't  do ; 
we  cannot  "  stand  pat."  It  is  the  square  deal,  or  bribes 
and  brickbats ;  Horace  Andrews  or  Mark  Hanna ;  Tom 
Johnson  or  George  Cox,  all  over  the  United  States.1 

i  Ohio  went  Democratic  in  1905  with  an  astonishing  majority  of 
some  50,000  for  Pattison,  the  Democratic  nominee  for  Governor. 
Cincinnati  rose  and,  overthrowing  Cox,  elected  Judge  Dempsey 
Mayor  on  a  fusion  ticket.  Toledo,  beating  both  the  old  parties, 
elected  for  Mayor,  Brand  Whitlock  as  the  successor  of  Sam  Jones, 
and,  as  for  Cleveland — Cleveland  reflected  Tom  Johnson  with  an 
increased  majority. 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE 

PART   I.— THE    CONQUEST,   SHOWING    HOW   THE    PENN- 
SYLVANIA   RAILROAD    SEIZED    THE    GOVERNMENT 

EVERY  loyal  citizen  of  the  United  States  owes  New  Jer- 
sey a  grudge.  The  State  is  corrupt;  so  are  certain  other 
States.  That  the  corruption  of  those  other  States  hurts  us 
all  I  have  tried  to  indicate  by  tracing  the  corrupt  origin 
of  the  Senators  they  send  to  Washington  to  dominate  our 
national  legislation ;  and  there  is  nothing  very  exceptional 
about  the  Senators  from  New  Jersey.  But  this  State 
doubly  betrays  us.  The  corrupt  government  of  Illinois 
sold  out  its  people  to  its  own  grafters;  the  organized 
grafters  of  Missouri,  Wisconsin,  and  Rhode  Island  sold, 
or  are  selling,  out  their  States  to  bigger  grafters  outside. 
Jersey  has  been  bought  and  sold  both  at  home  and  abroad ; 
the  State  is  owned  and  governed  to-day  by  a  syndicate 
representing  capitalists  of  Newark,  Philadelphia,  New 
York,  London,  and  Amsterdam.  The  offense  which  com- 
mands our  special  attention,  however,  and  lifts  this  State 
into  national  distinction,  is  this :  New  Jersey  is  selling  out 
the  rest  of  us. 

New  Jersey  charters  the  trusts.  Now,  I  am  not  "  anti- 
trust," and  I  have  no  words  to  waste  upon  an  economic 
discussion  of  the  charter-granting  function  of  govern- 
ment, State  or  National.  Citizenship  is  my  theme,  the 

209 


210     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

character  of  a  "  sovereign  people  "  and  the  effect  on  the 
nation  as  a  whole  of  the  failure  of  any  part — ward,  town, 
county,  or  State — to  do  its  full  duty.  And  the  point  to  fix 
in  mind  at  present  is  that  when,  a  few  years  ago,  the 
American  people  were  disposed  to  take  up  deliberately 
and  solve  intelligently  the  common  great  trust  problem, 
some  of  the  American  people  seized  it  and  settled  it  alone ; 
when  the  States  united  were  considering  whether  to  main- 
tain the  system  of  competition,  which  was  called  the  "  life 
of  trade,"  some  of  the  States  declared  for  monopolies ; 
when  the  United  States  was  contriving  to  curb  the  growth 
of  overwhelming  combinations  of  capital,  New  Jersey,  for 
one,  sold  to  the  corporations  a  general  law  which  was  a 
general  license  to  grow,  combine,  and  overwhelm  as  they 
would,  not  in  Jersey  alone,  but  anywhere  in  the  United 
States.  Maybe  this  was  wise,  but  that  isn't  why  Jersey  did 
it.  She  not  only  licensed  companies  to  do  in  other  States 
what  those  States  would  not  license ;  she  licensed  them  to 
do  in  those  other  States  what  she  would  not  let  them  do  in 
Jersey.  No,  our  sister  State  was  not  prompted  by  any 
abstract  consideration  of  right  and  wisdom.  New  Jersey 
sold  us  out  for  money.  She  passed  her  miscellaneous  incor- 
poration acts  for  revenue.  And  she  gets  the  revenue.  Her 
citizens  pay  no  direct  State  tax.  The  corporations  pay  all 
the  expenses  of  the  State,  and  more.  It  was  "  good  busi- 
ness." But  it  was  bribery,  the  bribery  of  a  whole  State; 
and  it  was  treason.  If  there  is  such  a  thing  as  treason  by 
a  State,  then  New  Jersey  is  a  traitor  State. 

Nor  is  this  the  first  time  she  has  appeared  in  that  char- 
acter.  'Way  back  in  the  middle  of  the  last  century  public 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE 

opinion  in  the  other  States  was  declaring  Jersey  a  "  for- 
eign country,"  "  out  of  the  Union."  In  New  York  they 
spoke  of  "  the  United  States  and  New  Jersey,"  and  Phila- 
delphia sang  a  street  song  calling  her  "  Spain."  The 
grudge  of  those  olden  days  was  the  grudge  of  our  day: 
her  "  liberal  policy "  toward  corporations.  She  main- 
tained a  railroad  monopoly  which  exploited  interstate  com- 
merce. It  exploited  her  also,  as  we  shall  see,  but  her  chief 
loss  was  her  good  name,  and  she  was  paid  for  that.  States, 
like  cities,  have  specialties.  When  I  was  studying  munici- 
pal corruption  I  found  that  most  of  the  big  cities  had  near 
them  lesser  towns,  to  which  the  vicious  could  retreat  when, 
during  "  reform  "  or  other  emergencies,  the  cities  had  to 
be  "  good."  St.  Louis  had  its  East  St.  Louis ;  Pittsburg, 
its  Allegheny ;  Philadelphia,  its  Camden ;  and  New  York 
has  had  Greenwich,  Hoboken,  Jersey  City,  and  now  Brook- 
lyn may  play  the  part.  What  these  retreats  are  to  the 
vices  of  their  cities,  New  Jersey  is  to  the  vicious  business 
of  the  States — a  resort,  a  commercial  road  house,  a  finan- 
cial pirate's  haven.  New  Jersey  is  the  business  Tenderloin 
of  the  United  States. 

And  that  is  her  history.  From  the  moment  the  family 
of  States  was  formed,  the  fathers  have  gone  there  to  do 
things  they  dared  not  do  at  home;  beginning  with  Alex- 
ander Hamilton.  Every  American  child  knows  how  this 
great  statesman  stole  off  to  Jersey  Heights  to  fight  his 
fatal  duel  with  Aaron  Burr.  He  had  gone  there  before. 
He  had  gone  there  on  business  before.  He  was  the  founder 
of  the  first  great  Jersey  corporations,  and  his  charters 
initiated  the  liberal  policy  of  the  State  toward  corporate 


STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

business.  It  was  Alexander  Hamilton  who  discovered  the 
uses  of  New  Jersey. 

Lying  undeveloped  between  two  thriving  cities,  New 
York  and  Philadelphia,  New  Jersey,  in  the  early  part  of 
the  last  century,  was  a  barrier  between  the  East  and  the 
South  and  West.  How  to  get  over  or  around  Jersey  was 
a  national  problem ;  as  it  still  is.  Geographical  then,  it  is 
political  now,  and  it  has  come  down  to  us  political  and 
unsolved  because  the  old  solution  was  political.  The  geo- 
graphical barrier  was  turned  to  commercial  advantage  by 
political  power  under  the  lead  of  Hamilton.  He  foresaw 
that  the  State  was  to  be  a  national  highway,  and  that  the 
key  to  its  control  was  the  Hudson  shore  opposite  New 
York.  So  he  interested  the  Governor,  and  ex-Governor,  a 
future  Governor,  and  other  leading  citizens  of  New  Jersey, 
and  they  formed,  in  1804,  The  Associates  of  the  Jersey 
Company — to  protect  the  public  interest?  Not  at  all. 

Hamilton  had  a  theory.  He  honestly  believed  that  the 
people  could  not  govern  themselves.  Thomas  Jefferson  be- 
lieved they  could,  and  he  organized  the  Democratic  party, 
which  stood,  for  a  while,  for  a  representative  democracy, 
a  government  representing  the  common  interests  of  all  the 
people,  with  special  privileges  for  none.  Hamilton,  who 
led  the  Federalist  party,  held  that,  since  there  was  no  king 
and  no  nobility,  the  Republic  must  be  built  upon  the  grate- 
ful loyalty  of  a  specially  interested  business  class.  Hamil- 
ton's theory  has  prevailed.  It  is  a  condition  now  in  every 
State  that  I  have  studied.  The  Jeffersonian  idea  still  lives 
here  and  there,  as  in  President  Roosevelt's  platform,  a 
"  square  deal,"  but  wherever  it  is  revived — in  Wisconsin, 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      213 

Missouri,  Illinois,  or  in  the  Congress — there  is  trouble. 
There  is  no  trouble  in  New  Jersey.  Hamilton  himself 
nursed  the  infancy  of  that  State. 

The  great  Federalist  from  New  York  and  the  leading 
citizens  of  New  Jersey  combined  to  have  and  to  hold  "  the 
gateway  of  the  continent  "  as  private  property,  and  Ham- 
ilton's charter  not  only  gave  his  company  governmental 
powers  and  rights  and  privileges,  troublesome  to  the  com- 
monwealth down  to  to-day,  it  taught  the  "  best  people  " 
to  rule  and,  ruling,  to  use  the  State  for  private  business 
purposes.  The  lesson  was  well  learned.  In  1830,  when  a 
railroad  was  projected  from  Camden  to  Amboy,  the  pro- 
moters, being  pioneer  railroad  men,  were  doubtful  of  the 
success  of  the  scheme ;  but  they  were  leading  citizens  of  the 
State,  and  they  went  to  the  State  for  aid  and  easy  terms. 
Though  the  route  chosen  was  the  shortest  way  through 
Jersey  from  Philadelphia  waters  to  a  water  connection 
with  New  York,  they  talked  in  modern  terms  of  "  develop- 
ing the  resources  of  the  State,"  and  the  Legislature  of 
1830,  to  which  they  applied,  met  full  of  popular  enthusiasm 
to  grant  all  that  the  company  might  ask.  And  this  is  all 
that  it  asked :  a  monopoly  forever  of  the  New  York-Phila- 
delphia traffic;  exemption  in  perpetuity  from  taxation;  a 
State  subscription  to  thsir  stock;  and  plenty  of  time  to 
build.  And  they  got  all  this. 

What  return  did  they  make,  these  leading  Jerseymen, 
for  the  generosity  of  their  own  people  and  the  substantial 
aid  of  their  own  State?  Gratitude?  Loyalty?  Hamilton's 
theory  is  a  modern  theory;  this  question  is  a  modern 
question ;  only  the  answer  is  old.  These  men  made  the  same 


STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

return  to  their  State  that  such  men  so  favored  have  made 
in  our  other  States :  political  corruption.  So  far  as  I  can 
make  out,  our  privileged  classes  are  not  grateful ;  they  are 
disloyal.  The  very  favors  granted  them  make  our  leading 
men  enemies  of  the  Republic. 

The  promoters  of  the  Camden  and  Amboy  foresaw  what 
the  people  did  not,  that  their  monopoly  was  against  public 
interest ;  that  their  exemption  would  become  a  public  bur- 
den; that  their  success  would  tempt  rivals  into  the  field; 
and  that  the  development  of  the  resources  of  the  State, 
which  they  promised,  would  make  more  railways  necessary. 
To  protect  their  precious  privileges,  therefore,  they  set 
deliberately  about  corrupting  the  State.  And  how  they 
did  corrupt  it !  Like  the  "  best  people  "  of  Rhode  Island, 
they  bought  the  voters  with  cash  at  the  polls ;  they  bought 
the  political  parties  with  contributions  to  the  campaign 
funds ;  they  organized  machines  and  reorganized  the  gov- 
ernment, county  by  county,  town  by  town,  Legislature  after 
Legislature.  They  nominated  their  men  for  office,  petty  and 
important,  made  themselves  and  their  kind  Governors  and 
United  States  Senators ;  they  ruled  the  State.  They  put 
the  railroad  above  the  State.  With  the  fat  profits  of  their 
State-granted  privileges,  they  so  corrupted  the  State  that 
the  government  represented,  not  the  people  of  New  Jersey, 
but  its  railroad.  It  was  a  national  scandal. 

New  Jersey  became  known  as  the  State  of  Camden  and 
Amboy,  and  that  is  what  she  was ;  and  as  such  she  was  exe- 
crated and  ridiculed  throughout  the  Union.  The  railroad 
monopoly  charged  excessive  rates,  but  it  was  a  monopoly ; 
there  was  no  way  around  it.  Canals  and  waterways  were 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      215 

used ;  the  Camden  and  Amboy  fought,  then  bought  them. 
Other  railroads  over  better  land  routes  were  pro j  ected,  one 
to  Jersey  City.  When  these  were  forced  through,  the  Cam- 
den  and  Amboy  forced  leases  and  combinations,  and  with 
one  of  them  acquired  the  majority  stock  of  Hamilton's 
old  associates  of  Jersey.  Since  the  associates  held  the  ex- 
clusive ferry  privilege  from  all  the  available  shore,  the 
political  monopoly  was  made  physical ;  no  other  roads  could 
have  a  New  York  terminal  in  Jersey,  except  by  "  making 
land  "  at  inconvenient  places. 

The  period  that  followed,  down  to  1873,  was  one  of  the 
most  disgraceful  in  the  history  of  the  commercial  cor- 
ruption of  American  politics.  The  United  States  was  grow- 
ing, business  was  increasing,  and  the  traffic  had  to  pass 
over  "  the  highway  of  the  continent."  Other  roads  had  to 
come,  and  they  did  come.  The  new  companies  "  made  land," 
dug  tunnels,  crossed  mountains — the  physical  difficulties 
were  overcome  in  time;  it  was  the  political  monopoly,  the 
highwayman  State  itself,  that  held  up  the  business  enter- 
prise of  the  whole  country.  Not  that  these  new  promoters 
were  not  willing  to  pay.  They,  also,  were  great  captains 
of  industry,  and  they  went  to  Trenton  with  their  pockets 
full  of  bribe  money.  Ask  an  aged  Jersey  grafter  for  the 
traditions  of  that  time,  and  a  lascivious  expression  of 
greedy  contemplation  will  come  over  his  face.  "  Those  were 
the  days !  "  The  new  roads  paid  cheerful  blackmail  to  the 
Jersey  Legislature,  and  the  Jersey  legislators  took  money 
from  "  the  foreigners,"  but  they  stood  by  the  Camden  and 
Amboy,  which  paid  more.  And  the  people  of  the  State 
were  with  the  monopoly.  The  people  of  the  United  States 


216     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

were  back  of  the  new  roads,  and  public  opinion  ran  high, 
but  Jersey  was  grateful  and  loyal  to  the  railroad  that 
"  made  the  State."  Jersey  had  "  State  pride."  She  was 
a  "  State's  rights  "  State.  She  had  a  few  slaves,  and  leaned 
to  the  South ;  she  is  the  one  Northern  State  that  refused, 
during  the  war,  to  let  her  soldiers  vote  in  the  field,  and  so 
cast  her  electoral  vote  against  Lincoln.  The  State  that 
lets  trusts  do  in  other  States  what  those  States  won't  per- 
mit, and  what  Jersey  won't  permit  in  Jersey,  was  ever  for 
herself  and  her  own ;  and  in  the  great  "  National  Railway 
fight  "  you  find  her  legislative  (Camden  and  Amboy)  ora- 
tors appealing  to  the  local  sentiment  against  "  foreign  rail- 
road companies  which  propose  to  use  the  State  only  as  a 
convenience,"  and  a  "  corporation  chartered  by  Pennsyl- 
vania in  which  the  State  of  New  Jersey  has  no  particular 
interest." 

What  "  particular  interest "  had  the  State  in  the  Camden 
and  Amboy  ?  Indignant  public  opinion  in  the  nation  asked 
and  the  newspapers  found  out.  In  lieu  of  all  taxes,  the 
Camden  and  Amboy  Railroad  had  arranged  with  the  Cam- 
den and  Amboy  Legislature  in  its  charters  that  the  State 
was  to  collect  so  much  a  head  on  passengers,  and  so  much  a 
ton  on  freight  carried  across  the  State  on  the  road.  In 
other  words,  besides  the  onerous  charges  for  transporta- 
tion, the  railroad  was  to  collect  what  was  called  a  "  transit 
duty  "  for  the  State.  It  was  this  discovery  that  finally  en- 
raged the  national  mind  and  brought  down  upon  Jersey  the 
old  charge  of  treason  referred  to  above.  The  "  transit 
duty  "  was  called  by  the  press  of  New  York  and  Philadel- 
phia an  "  import  duty."  Jerseymen  to  this  day  are  sensi- 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE     217 

tive  on  the  point.  They  declare,  as  Governorjlandolph  put 
it  in  a  special  message  to  the  Legislature  of  1869,  that  the 
transit  duty  system  was  "  either  persistently  misunderstood 
or  willfully  misrepresented  by  the  citizens  of  other  States." 
The  Jersey  reasoning  is  that  any  tax  on  a  railroad  is 
borne  by  the  traffic,  and,  of  course,  this  is  sound.  None 
the  less  the  "  misrepresentation  "  by  the  other  States  was 
just:  the  obvious  intention  of  that  transit  duty,  levied  only 
on  through  freight  and  through  passengers,  was  to  relieve 
the  road  of  a  tax,  and  let  the  State  take  it  out  of  the 
country  at  large! 

That  is  New  Jersey.  That  was  the  spirit  of  those  old 
transit  duties,  that  is  the  spirit  of  her  modern  corporation 
policy.  Being  that,  however,  being  what  she  was  to  the 
Camden  and  Amboy,  Jersey  was  sure,  sooner  or  later,  to 
let  others  in  unto  her.  The  business  which  builds  a  mo- 
nopoly on  political  corruption,  prepares  the  way  for  its 
own  undoing.  One  by  one,  the  Delaware,  Lackawanna  and 
Western,  the  Erie,  the  Jersey  Central,  etc.,  famous  bribers 
all,  bribed  their  way  in,  fighting  the  Camden,  fighting  one 
another,  till,  being  in,  they  joined  together  to  fight  with 
bribery  belated  newcomers  who  came  with  fresh  bribes. 
None  of  these  roads,  however,  could  compete  for  the  New 
York-Philadelphia  traffic.  The  Camden,  reorganized  as  the 
United  Railroads  of  New  Jersey,  held  that  fast,  and  a 
National  Railroad  Company  which  proposed  to  parallel  the 
monopoly  was  held  at  bay,  session  after  session,  by  the 
State  of  Camden  and  Amboy.  And  to  what  end? 

In  1871  the  Cstmden  and  Amboy  was  "  leased  "  to  the 
Pennsylvania  Railroad.  The  "  leading  citizens  "  of  Jersey, 


218     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

— a  "  specially  interested  business  class,"  if  there  ever  was 
one — had  not  only  not  been  made  "  gratefully  loyal,"  they 
had  developed  in  the  State  a  loyalty  to  their  company,  cor- 
rupt and  sordid,  but  none  the  less  grateful,  and  then  they 
turned  their  favored  Jersey  railroad  over  to  a  foreign  cor- 
poration, owned  in  Philadelphia,  New  York,  London,  and 
Amsterdam.  Like  the  Rhode  Island  captains  of  industry 
and  politics,  those  of  New  Jersey  financed  their  political 
power  and  sold  it — sacred  charters,  rights,  privileges, 
property,  exemptions,  and  all — to  Pennsylvania  capital, 
whither,  apparently,  all  our  curses  flow. 

New  Jersey,  dumfounded,  turned  to  rend  the  now 
"  foreign  "  monopoly.  The  lease  was  attacked  and  a  just 
tax  was  proposed  for  the  road.  The  National  and  other 
railway  promoters  who  rushed  with  fresh  hope  to  Trenton, 
were  cheered  on  by  the  State,  and  a  general  railway  law 
to  permit  anybody  to  build  a  railway  anywhere  was 
broached.  It  looked  as  though  Jersey  meant  to  be  free. 
But  the  "  leading  Jerseymen,"  who  had  delivered  over  the 
great  Jersey  railroad,  threw  into  the  bargain  their  old 
Camden  and  Amboy  political  organization.  In  other  words, 
with  the  monopoly,  they  sold  also  their  people,  their  State, 
or,  the  political  machinery  which  held  the  sovereignty  of 
the  State!  This  machinery  was  somewhat  run  down  and 
the  sale  had  given  it  a  bad  jar,  but  the  buyers  were  men 
who  knew  their  business.  Heavily  owned  though  it  is 
abroad,  the  Pennsylvania  has  always  been  managed  by 
American  captains  of  industry,  and  they  know  how  to  pro- 
tect their  stockholders  against  the  American  people ;  other 
American  businesses  have  beaten  them  at  times ;  the  govern- 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      219 

ment  very  seldom.  They  are,  and  they  always  have  been, 
masters  of  American  politics.  When  the  Pennsylvania  went 
into  Jersey,  it  went  in  with  eyes  wide  open.  It  knew  it  had 
to  conquer  the  State,  and  it  did  conquer  it.  The  Pennsyl- 
vania Railroad  completed  the  corruption  of  that  State, 
perfected  the  present  Jersey  government,  and,  as  we  shall 
see,  adopted  for  purposes  of  its  own  the  charter-granting 
system  which  has  produced,  for  example,  the  Shipbuilding 
Trust. 

The  conquest  of  New  Jersey  by  the  Pennsylvania  was 
slow  but  exciting,  and  to  a  people  once  so  swollen  with  State 
pride,  now  so  meek  under  their  State's  humiliation,  the 
story  must  be  fascinating.  Politically  speaking,  the  State 
was  Democratic.  Now  it  is  Republican.  It  was  Democratic 
before  and  during  the  war.  The  soldiers  returning  home 
in  1866  made  the  Legislature  Republican  for  two  years, 
but  the  State  was  only  going  back  to  its  own  when,  in  1869 
and  1870,  the  Democrats  carried  both  houses  of  the  Legis- 
lature. The  preparation  for  the  "  lease "  was  begun  in 
1870,  and  the  Legislature  reflected  the  popular  feeling, 
which  was  intense,  against  the  "  foreign  monopoly."  There 
was  nothing  for  it,  therefore,  but  to  take  control,  and  that 
is  the  settled  Pennsylvania  policy:  not  to  buy  legislators, 
but  to  own  the  Legislature;  not  to  corrupt  government, 
but  to  be  the  State.  So,  while  the  Jerseymen  in  the  pro- 
posed National  Company  were  charging  up  to  Trenton  to 
get  their  charter,  the  foreign  conquerors  laid  a  plan  to 
get  New  Jersey. 

The  first  step  toward  getting  a  government  to  represent 
you  (whether  you  are  a  grafter  or  a  good  citizen)  is  to  get 


220     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

a  party  to  represent  you.  The  Pennsylvania  plan  was  to 
buy  at  the  polls  the  election  of  a  Republican  Legislature, 
for  1871,  to  represent  the  Pennsylvania.  That  Legislature 
would  have  to  reapportion  the  State  upon  the  basis  of  the 
census  of  1870,  and  it  could  gerrymander  the  districts  so 
as  to  hold  the  Assembly  for  years.  The  Democrats  nearly 
spoiled  the  scheme.  Getting  wind  of  it,  they  and  the 
National  undertook  to  anticipate  the  gerrymander  with 
one  of  their  own.  This  was  "  unprecedented  " ;  but  a  bill 
was  drawn  and  the  Pennsylvania  had  to  fight  it  with  fire. 
The  Camden  machine  owned  some  Democrats  along  the 
line  of  the  road,  and  they  bought  enough  more  to  beat  that 
Democratic  gerrymander  in  that  Democratic  Legislature, 
even  though  the  Democrats  knew  it  might  mean  the  loss 
of  their  power  for  ten  years. 

The  campaign  that  followed  was  one  of  those  tests  of 
democratic  government  which  go  to  show  that  the  cynics 
may  be  right  when  they  say  the  people  can't  govern  them- 
selves. The  issue  was  plain — monopoly  vs.  competition — 
and  popular  sentiment  was  strong  and  all  one  way.  Money 
was  spent  by  both  sides  in  immense  sums  at  the  polls, 
and  voters  took  money  from  both  sides.  No  one  knows,  of 
course,  which  party  put  up  the  greater  amount,  but  here 
is  the  result :  the  anti-monopoly  voters  threw  out  the  "  anti- 
monopoly  party,"  and  elected  a  Republican  majority  to 
both  houses. 

The  monopoly  victory  was  so  decisive  that  the  National 
made  no  open  fight  in  the  next  session.  The  Republicans 
had  little  else  to  do  but  to  reapportion  the  State ;  and  they 
did  indeed  reapportion  it !  I  have  come  upon  some  interest- 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      221 

ing  gerrymanders  in  the  course  of  my  investigations,  never 
one  like  this.  It  amounted  to  a  reorganization  of  govern- 
ment. Jersey  City  was  a  Democratic  stronghold.  This 
Republican  Legislature  drew  a  district  shaped  like  a  horse- 
shoe to  contain  almost  all  the  Democratic  voters,  made  that 
one  assembly  district,  and  divided  up  the  rest  of  the  city 
so  that  the  Republican  minority  could  easily  elect  all  the 
other  assemblymen.  This  is  but  a  sample  of  what  was  done 
all  over  the  State.  That  gerrymander  made  Jersey  a 
national  scandal  again,  but  it  "  worked  " ;  the  Democrats 
could  roll  up  a  majority  of  10,000  for  a  Governor  without 
budging  the  Republicans  from  the  Legislature.  Nor  is 
that  all  that  was  accomplished.  The  (Pennsylvania)  Re- 
publicans legislated  Democrats  out  of  office,  even  down  into 
cities  and  counties,  turned  local  elective  officers  into  com- 
missions appointed  by  the  Legislature,  transferred  purely 
municipal  functions  over  to  Republican  boards  and  so 
fastened  the  hold  of  rings  upon  cities,  towns,  and  counties 
that  stealing  was  overdone.  Two  cities,  Rahway  and  Eliza- 
beth, were  run  into  bankruptcy.  One  Senator  who  legislated 
himself  into  power  robbed  himself  into  prison.  The  ring 
treasurer  of  a  third,  Jersey  City,  had  to  flee  with  $60,000 
to  Mexico,  where  bandits  robbed  him.  The  evils  were  so 
great,  indeed,  that  the  next  Legislature  (1872)  had  to 
send  a  committee  to  "  investigate  "  Jersey  City.  The  ring 
wined  and  dined  and  otherwise  so  entertained  the  com- 
mittee that  their  report  was  a  "  whitewash,"  and,  mean- 
while, the  riot  of  special  legislation  went  on  at  Trenton. 
Governor  Joel  Parker  in  his  message  of  1873  said:  "  The 
general  laws  passed  at  the  last  session  are  contained  in 


222     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

about  one  hundred  pages  of  the  Session  Laws,  while  the 
special  and  private  laws  occupy  over  1,450  pages  of  the 
same  book."  The  constitutional  amendment,  forbidding 
special  and  private  legislation,  which  the  Governor  pro- 
posed, was  finally  forced  through  by  public  clamor,  and  a 
timely  church  raid  (which  I  cannot  stop  to  describe)  upon 
the  public  treasury. 

We  must  not  blame  the  Pennsylvania  for  all  this,  nor  the 
Republicans.  The  Democrats  were  "  just  as  bad."  The 
Governor  of  New  Jersey  appoints  all  but  two  State  officers, 
all  law  judges,  and  all  county  prosecutors  of  pleas,  so  that 
even  when  the  corrupted  people  elected  corrupted  Republi- 
cans to  the  Legislature,  the  corrupt  Democratic  "  State 
Ring  "  had  the  State  graft ;  and  that  was  rich  and  exhaus- 
tive. The  Republicans  were  compelled  to  resort  to  the  local 
graft,  and  the  Pennsylvania  had  to  let  them  have  it.  As 
representatives  of  our  ruling  special  interests  have  often 
explained  to  me,  they  have  no  time  to  rule  well ;  they  can- 
not be  bothered  giving  us  good  government;  it  is  all  they 
can  do  to  protect  themselves.  And  certainly  the  Penn- 
sylvania was  fully  occupied  at  this  period.  The  National 
Railway  people  returned  to  the  charge  in  1873,  with  boodle 
in  their  hands,  and  public  opinion  at  their  backs.  Both 
houses  were  Republican,  but  the  Pennslyvania's  system  was 
not  perfected  and  the  Republican  legislators  were  untried ; 
corruption  was  at  that  low  stage  where  "  money  talks  " — 
not  the  campaign  fund,  but  cash  bribery.  So  you  find  the 
press  of  the  day  asking,  "  Do  the  Pennsylvania  people  own 
the  Legislature,  or  must  they  buy  it?  "  The  answer  was 
that  they  owned  it,  but  it  was  so  corrupt  that  they  had  to 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      223 

buy  it  over  again.  They  organized  the  Senate,  but  the 
opposition  showed  strong  in  the  Assembly. 

When  the  Assembly  took  up  and  advanced  a  National 
Railway  bill,  the  State  was  in  a  passion  of  delight.  The 
promoters  had  filled  up  their  directorate  with  well-known 
Jersey  names,  and  Jersey  turned  out  to  help  these  honest 
Jerseymen  break  the  corrupt  foreign  monopoly.  The 
monopoly  men  had  a  chance  to  deliver  a  crushing  blow  to 
this  provincialism.  Through  the  Legislature  of  1872,  some- 
body had  "  sneaked  "  an  act  ostensibly  for  a  small  ore  rail- 
road up  in  Morris  County.  After  it  was  passed  somebody 
else  had  bought  the  ore  franchise,  and  had  begun  to  con- 
nect a  lot  of  small  railroads  to  make  a  continuous  line  from 
Jersey  City  to  Philadelphia.  A  section  of  the  act  per- 
mitted this.  The  railroad  Republicans,  "  called  down  "  to 
Philadelphia,  declared  that  that  section  was  inserted  after 
passage.  Ordered  to  prove  it,  they  produced  evidence  that 
a  certain  official  had  received  $162,800  to  put  through  the 
job,  and  that  the  money  came  from  the  National.  The 
Pennsylvania  cried  "  Fraud,"  but  public  opinion  would  not 
credit  such  trickery  in  honest  Jersey  directors  till  the 
Pennsylvania  took  the  matter  to  court.  Just  when  every- 
body was  rejoicing  over  the  progress  of  the  National's 
charter  bill,  a  decision  was  handed  down  declaring  in  effect 
that  there  was  indeed  fraud,  and  that  the  National's  fran- 
chise steal  should  not  succeed. 

The  Jersey  public  was  prepared  now  to  turn  in  disgust 
from  the  National,  but,  after  all,  as  one  Senator  put  it, 
"  while  some  of  that  crowd  should  be  in  State's  prison, 
some  of  the  Pennsylvania  men  deserve  as  richly  to  be  there." 


224     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

So  the  fight  went  on.  The  Assembly  passed  the  National 
bill  up  to  the  Senate.  There  a  Pennsylvania  bill,  author- 
izing that  company  to  occupy  the  disputed  territory,  was 
introduced.  Thirty  days'  notice  was  required  for  such  a 
bill,  but  the  Pennsylvania  appropriated  a  notice  published 
for  another  bill.  Senator  Sewell  (Rep.)  confessed  the 
trick;  Senator  McPherson  (Dem.),  besought  his  col- 
leagues not  to  entertain  such  a  suspicion.  The  Pennsyl- 
vania already  was  getting  representatives  in  the  Dem- 
ocratic party  as  well  as  in  its  own,  and  these  two  Senators 
were  for  "  the  road  " ;  they  advanced  "  the  Pennsy's  "  bill. 
There  was  no  expectation  of  passing  it ;  it  was  meant  only 
to  block  the  game.  And  it  did,  for  a  few  days.  Then  a 
belief  spread  that  the  National's  bill  could  be  passed. 
Between  bribery  and  the  pressure  of  public  opinion,  cer- 
tain doubtful  members  were  "  fixed  to  vote  right."  But 
where  was  the  bill?  The  Senate  called  for  it;  it  was  not 
forthcoming.  The  committee  was  asked  to  report.  But  the 
committeeman  who  had  it  was  missing,  too.  There  was 
an  uproar,  and  the  Senate  demanded  a  report.  Senators 
Sewell  and  McPherson,  in  defense  of  the  committee,  be- 
sought their  colleagues  to  modify  their  tone,  and  "  de- 
mand "  was  amended  to  "  request."  Then  the  secretary 
of  the  Senate  produced  the  bill  from  his  pocket,  saying 
the  absent  committeeman  had  ordered  him  "  not  to  let  it 
get  out."  Why?  The  Pennsylvania  had  bought  back 
those  doubtful  Senators,  but  hoped  to  save  them  the  ex- 
posure of  a  vote.  They  did  their  best,  but  when  the  lobby- 
ists saw  that  the  roll  must  be  called  they  stood  behind 
pillars  grinning.  They  foresaw  the  howl  that  would  rise 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      225 

from  the  Jersey  crowd,  but  they  did  not  foresee  the  full 
force  of  the  rage.  The  bill  was  beaten.  There  was  a  pause, 
then  the  crowd,  yelling  "  Kill  him ! "  rushed  at  one  Sena- 
tor, and  he  had  to  be  rescued  and  escorted  to  his  hotel  by 
a  bodyguard  of  lobbyists. 

Thus  again  the  Pennsylvania  was  victorious,  but  the 
triumph  this  time  was  short-lived.  The  public  was  in- 
censed, and  the  crowd  at  Trenton  was  reckless.  The  old 
cry  for  a  general  railway  law  was  taken  up.  The  sentiment 
for  such  a  law  had  been  so  strong  that  the  Pennslyvania's 
orators  in  the  Legislature  had  been  using  it  all  through 
the  session,  not  because  "  the  "  road  wanted  to  throw  the 
State  open,  but  to  divide  the  National's  forces.  Now  the 
National's  legislators  saw  their  chance  to  get  even  and 
to  win.  A  general  railway  bill  had  been  introduced  early 
in  the  session ;  it  had  come  from  an  obscure  member  and 
been  consigned  to  obscurity  in  a  "  safe "  committee.  In 
the  heat  of  defeat,  the  National  legislators  called  for  that 
bill.  "  The  Pennsylvania  want  a  general  railroad  bill ; 
here  they  have  one."  So,  with  the  sullen  citizens  looking 
on,  this  bill  was  passed.  Some  say  the  Pennsylvania  had 
surrendered  in  a  deal  with  its  rivals;  others  that  the  road 
"  couldn't  make  its  legislators  stand  up."  At  any  rate,  it 
was  without  any  open  opposition  from  this  quarter  that 
the  present  general  railway  law  of  New  Jersey  was  en- 
acted— amid  cheers,  speeches,  and  the  firing  of  cannon. 
Jersey  was  a  free  State ! 

Was  she?  Eternal  vigilance,  they  say,  is  the  price  of 
liberty.  It  is,  and  the  corruptionists  pay  it.  When  the 
good  citizens  of  Jersey  went  home,  the  Pennsylvania  went 


226     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

to  work.  Hence,  the  Pennsylvania  came  to  rule  again. 
When  the  people  separated,  having  beaten  one  bribing 
railroad  with  another  and  opened  the  way  to  all  bribing 
railroads,  all  the  railroads  got  together  to  beat  all  the 
people.  They  had  to.  They  had  privileges  and  exemptions 
which  were  valuable,  and  against  the  public  interest. 
Hence  Jersey  became,  not  free,  but  common — free  only 
to  the  railroads,  which  had  to  control  the  government. 

The  Pennsylvania  took  the  lead.  Being  a  non-resident 
ruler,  the  company  must  depend  upon  the  loyalty  (to  it) 
of  citizens  of  the  State.  The  long  monopoly  fight  had 
served  to  test  men,  and  the  road  used  all  its  machinery, 
political  and  financial,  to  reward  and  advance  those  who 
had  stayed  bought,  or,  for  any  reason,  had  stood  by  it, 
and  to  punish  and  retire  those  who,  for  any  reason,  had 
stood  up  for  the  public.  General  William  J.  Sewell,  the 
Republican  State  Senator  whom  we  have  had  a  glimpse 
of  speaking  openly  for  the  monopoly,  was  made  "  the  " 
man.  He  was  a  "  good  fellow."  An  Irishman,  unlettered, 
but  able;  generous,  but  firm;  unscrupulous,  but  magnifi- 
cently candid,  he  never  made  any  bones  about  the  fact 
that  he  represented  "  the  road."  He  was  an  officer  of  the 
company.  The  head  of  a  lot  of  subsidiary  Camden  and 
Amboy  companies,  he  was  the  boss  of  the  old  South  Jer- 
sey Tammany-Republican  political  machine,  and  under 
the  eye  of  the  "  head  offices  "  of  the  Pennsylvania  Com- 
pany at  Philadelphia  he  extended  his  power  until  he  be- 
came the  recognized  Republican  boss  of  the  State. 

General  Sewell  was  more  than  that.  As  the  repre- 
sentative of  that  railroad  which  was  the  chief  source  of 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      227 

corruption,  he  was  a  power  in  both  parties.  His  policy 
was  broad.  He  furthered  business,  especially  privileged 
business;  he  encouraged  all  industry  and  enterprise,  but 
his  chief  care  was  for  those  that  wanted  things,  favors  or 
protection,  and  were  willing  to  help  bear  the  expense  of 
corrupting  the  State.  All  the  railroads  were  in  this  govern- 
ing class,  and,  though  some  of  them  were  Democrats,  they 
had  so  much  in  common  that  they  exercised  eternal  vigi- 
lance together,  i.  e.,  let  their  lobbies  and  legislators  labor 
together.  For  example,  Miles  Ross,  the  Democratic  boss 
of  Middlesex  County,  who  represented  the  Lehigh  Valley 
Railroad  both  in  his  county  and  in  the  Legislature  (till 
he  went  to  Congress),  was  practically  a  lieutenant  of  Sew- 
ell,  and  politicians  and  newspaper  men  told  me  that  most 
of  the  time  the  election  of  a  Democratic  Governor  and  a 
Republican  Senate  was  the  result  of  an  understanding 
between  the  parties.  They  fought  for  the  Assembly,  but 
even  that  was  to  be  always  "  railroad."  So  Sewell  be- 
came in  time  a  bipartisan  boss  and  the  actual  head  of  the 
State.  That  is  to  say,  he,  with  United  States  Senator  John 
R.  McPherson,  a  Democrat,  but  also  a  "  Penn.  man,"  ruled 
New  Jersey  in  the  interest  of  the  Pennsylvania  and  the 
other  railroads  and  "  business." 

Under  Sewell's  guidance  all  went  well  in  Jersey  for  a 
while.  There  were  troubles,  but  they  were  purely  political 
troubles,  and  we  have  little  to  do  with  "  pure  politics  " 
in  this  State.  Business  prospered,  and  every  American 
knowns  that  business  prosperity  is  all  that  men  and  gov- 
ernment exist  for.  The  Democratic  State  House  ring  was 
grafting  on  the  State,  and  the  county  rings  were  graft- 


228     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

ing  on  their  counties.  Miles  Ross  was  financiering  his 
Middlesex;  David  Baird,  Sewell's  Camden  lieutenant,  was 
making  his  county  pay ;  Garret  A.  Hobart  was  getting 
control  of  water,  both  for  power  and  for  life,  up  in 
Passaic,  etc.,  etc.  The  railroads  were  grabbing  water 
fronts  down  around  Jersey  City ;  the  Lehigh  had  bought 
and  was  running  down  its  cheap  competitor,  the  Morris 
Canal,  which  the  road  and  the  politicians  were  turning, 
without  a  license,  into  a  water  supply  for  towns  and 
factories.  I  cannot  go  into  all  the  "  enterprises  "  of  this 
kind  that  show  the  beneficence  of  Jersey's  business  gov- 
ernment in  that  period  of  prosperity  and  no  trouble.  One 
will  have  to  do,  an  incident  that  illustrates  the  most  points 
and  leads  us  up  to  the  second  pitched  battle  between  Jersey 
and  her  foreign  conquerors. 

By  1880,  Sewell's  government  was  so  entrenched  that 
both  parties  represented  the  railroads,  to  which  both 
looked  for  campaign  funds,  patronage,  and  other  favors. 
Some  of  the  Democratic  leaders  showed  a  dangerous  lean- 
ing to  public  opinion,  however,  and  it  was  decided  that 
the  time  had  about  come  to  elect  a  Republican  Governor, 
and  make  everything  "  safe  and  solid."  This  would  take 
lots  of  money,  so  Sewell  and  his  company  looked  around 
for  a  rich  candidate.  They  chose  a  suburbanite,  Frederic 
A.  Potts,  a  "  coal  king  "  of  New  York  City,  with  many 
corporation  connections,  and  a  director  of  the  Jersey 
Central.  To  bring  in  the  rest  of  the  railroads,  and  to 
finance  the  campaign,  Hobart  was  made  chairman  of  the 
Republican  State  committee. 

This  was  a  combination  of  sovereigns,  and  the  Dem- 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE     229 

ocrats  in  alarm  put  up  to  break  it  a  candidate  who  was 
expected  to  draw  Pennsylvania  railroad  support — George 
C.  Ludlow,  a  State  Senator  who  was  a  local  attorney  for 
"  the  "  road.  His  nomination  was  forced,  the  campaign  was 
a  scandal,  and  there  was  fraud  at  the  polls,  but  Ludlow  was 
elected.  Mr.  Potts  declared  that  the  Pennsylvania  did 
go  back  on  him,  and  when  Ludlow's  majority  proved  to 
be  only  251,  innocent  Republican  partisans  cried  "  Fraud," 
and  demanded  an  investigation.  Their  managers  sup- 
pressed this  move.  The  Republicans  were  in  no  position 
to  investigate,  and  besides,  the  Legislature  was  Republi- 
can, and  the  Governor,  though  a  Democrat,  was  a  Penn- 
sylvania railroad  man.  "  Business  "  would  be  "  safe." 

Much  stress  has  been  laid  in  these  articles  upon  the 
number  of  corporation  men  who  are  promoted  to  high 
places  in  our  government,  and  the  regularity  with  which 
they  represent  their  clients  is  significant.  But  the  ex- 
ceptions are  also  significant,  and  Governor  Ludlow  was  an 
exception.  When  he  became  Governor  of  New  Jersey  he 
represented  New  Jersey.  His  Republican  Legislature,  with 
Hobart  president  of  the  Senate,  represented  the  railroads 
and  the  joint  session,  with  "  Gardner  of  Atlantic  "  in  the 
chair,  sent  General  Sewell  to  the  United  States  Senate  to 
help  do  to  the  rest  of  us  what  he  was  doing  to  Jersey. 
A  flood  of  railroad  and  other  business  bills  were  passed, 
and  Governor  Ludlow  could  not  stop  them.  He  could 
speak  for  the  common  interest  of  the  State,  however,  and 
he  did,  and  in  1882  the  Assembly  turned  up  Democratic 
to  support  him.  The  Senate,  made  up,  like  Rhode  Island, 
of  twenty-one  Senators,  one  from  each  county,  no  matter 


230     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

what  the  population  is,  was  controlled  by  eleven  "  rotten 
boroughs."  So  the  upper  house  held  Republican,  and 
again  the  business  bills  flowed  in.  Among  them  were  sev- 
eral (introduced  by  "  Gardner  of  Atlantic ")  which 
separately  looked  innocent  enough,  but  which  together 
carried  a  deal.  One  was  to  enable  corporations  to  increase 
their  capital  stock,  another  was  to  "  file  maps,"  etc.  The 
first  was  to  help  one  party  in  the  Jersey  Central  to  vote 
another  out  of  control,  and  the  others  secured  to  the  Penn- 
sylvania a  right,  disputed  in  the  courts  at  the  time,  to 
seize,  hold,  and  exclude  Jersey  City  (and  its  sewer-pipes) 
and  others  from  a  certain  water  front.  The  Standard  Oil 
was  in  on  this.  This  company  had  sneaked  into  the  State 
underground,  with  her  pipe  lines,  the  railroads  and  the 
bosses  helping  her  and  holding  up  rivals.  That  was  her 
way.  The  Standard  Oil  hates  to  go  to  Legislatures  her- 
self, so  she  sends  her  railroads.  She  had  property  on  the 
water  front.  The  Pennsylvania  had  a  branch  to  it.  One 
of  the  little  "  niggers  "  discovered  in  this  group  of  bills 
was  a  provision  to  exempt  from  taxation,  etc. — this  "  ten- 
acre  terminal,"  which  included  the  Standard  Oil  property. 
These  bills  crept  undebated  through  the  Senate  and 
were  well  on  their  way  in  the  House,  when  their  rottenness 
was  discovered  and  declared.  Then  the  railroads  sent 
counsel  to  defend  them  and,  with  the  lobby  at  work, 
forced  them  on  up  to  the  Governor.  Tremendous  pressure 
was  brought  to  bear  upon  him  to  sign  them ;  the  corpora- 
tions demanded  that  he  be  loyal  to  them,  his  professional 
clients  and  his  political  creators,  and  they  threatened  to 
ruin  him  if  he  was  loyal  to  the  State.  Ludlow  vetoed  those 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      231 

bills  in  a  message  that  aroused  the  State.  No  matter.  The 
Republican  Senate  passed  them  over  the  veto,  and  the 
Democratic  House  was  doing  likewise,  when  a  member 
rose  in  his  place  and  waving  five  one-hundred-dollar  bills 
in  one  hand  and  an  affidavit  in  the  other,  announced  that 
this  money  was  half  of  a  bribe  of  $1,000  promised  him 
for  his  vote.  To  "  peach "  is  against  the  most  sacred 
rules  of  the  game.  The  House  adjourned.  A  committee 
was  appointed  to  investigate.  That  committee  heard  one 
assemblyman  confess  that  he  had  taken  a  retainer  to  de- 
liver "  three  or  four  speeches "  (including  his  vote,  of 
course)  for  the  bills ;  another  that  "  Cul "  Barcalow,  the 
Pennsylvania's  chief  lobbyist,  had  dropped  a  remark,  as 
lie  passed  him,  that  it  was  "  worth  a  thousand  "  to  vote 
for  the  bills.  So  there  was  money  in  the  business,  but  the 
committee  reported  that  the  lobbyist's  remark  was  a  joke 
(no  lobbyist  could  mean  such  a  thing  seriously)  ;  and,  as 
for  the  cash  shown  in  the  House,  that  could  not  be  traced 
to  a  corporation.  Nothing  was  done,  therefore.  But  the 
"  joke  "  and  some  sharp  maneuvering  beat  the  bills. 

Governor  Ludlow  rendered  his  State  a  far  greater  serv- 
ice than  this,  however.  Whenever  a  man  in  public  office 
actually  represents  the  public  interest,  he  revives  the 
Jeifersonian  idea,  and,  as  we  have  noticed  before,  that 
makes  trouble.  Governor  Ludlow  started  the  greatest 
trouble  Jersey  ever  had.  He  was  not  a  great  man  and  he 
seems  to  have  had  no  very  definite  policy.  Like  Folk  in 
Missouri,  like  LaFollette  in  Wisconsin,  and  like  Theodore 
Roosevelt  now  in  the  United  States,  whenever  he  saw  an 
evil  head  he  hit  it.  That  is  enough.  That  brings  the 


232     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

special  interests  out  into  the  light  and  raises  the  great 
question,  Who  is  to  govern  this  country,  the  people  or 
the  few  who  are  corrupting  it?  It  doesn't  matter  what 
the  particular  issue  is — a  revision  of  the  tariff,  a  ship 
subsidy  bill,  the  trial  of  a  boodler,  the  enforcement  of  a 
liquor  law,  the  just  taxation  of  a  railroad,  or  the  regula- 
tion of  railroad  rates — let  a  man  press  any  point  that 
touches  the  so-called  "  specially  interested  business  class  " 
and  he  will  arraign  against  him  all  the  allied  forces  that 
are  running  the  government — city,  State,  and  nation — to 
get  privileges  from  it  and  to  protect  those  that  they  already 
have. 

The  particular  issue  in  Jersey  is  "  equal  taxation,"  and 
Governor  Ludlow  raised  it.  It  was  the  underlying  issue 
in  the  'Sixties,  it  is  the  issue  over  there  to-day,  it  is  the 
issue  for  which,  principally,  the  railroads  had  been  pre- 
paring all  these  years.  They  "  had  to."  Every  Legislature 
from  the  'Thirties  on,  that  for  any  reason,  honest  or  cor- 
rupt, admitted  to  the  State  a  railroad  with  a  charter 
exempting  from  taxation  "  all  railroad  property  used  for 
railroad  purposes,"  made  it  absolutely  necessary,  accord- 
ing to  business  ethics,  to  help  corrupt  the  government  and 
keep  it  corrupt.  That  exemption  was  a  valuable  privilege, 
and  it  was  a  burden  to  the  people  of  the  State.  As  all 
those  many  Jersey  railroads  grew  and  prospered,  the  value 
and  the  amount  of  their  property  increased.  They  acquired 
more  and  more  land,  more  and  more  buildings,  more  and 
more  stations,  and  bigger  and  bigger  terminals.  Each 
purchase,  grab,  or  extension  of  theirs  removed  just  so 
much  of  the  most  valuable  property  from  local  and 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      233 

"  equal "  taxation.  The  cost  of  government  increased 
steadily,  of  course ;  the  railroads  were  careful  about  pub- 
lic improvements,  and  they  permitted  very  few.  But  the 
corruptionists  had  to  let  the  corrupted  local  leaders  have 
some  money  to  spend  in  (and  thus  appease,  satisfy,  bribe) 
their  counties.  So  the  expenses  went  on  growing,  and, 
since  the  railroads  could  not  be  taxed,  the  citizens  had  to 
pay;  not  only,  mind  you,  to  meet  the  normal  increase, 
but  the  deficiency  also,  due  to  the  growing  railroad 
exemptions. 

Charles  L.  Corbin,  now  one  of  the  leading  corporation 
lawyers  in  the  State,  summed  up  the  situation  at  the  time. 
He  was  explaining  how  it  came  about  that  New  Jersey 
had  such  a  heavy  debt  and  so  high  a  tax  rate.  It  was  not 
due,  he  said,  to  stealing.  "  Although  scandalous  defalca- 
tions have  come  to  light  in  probably  more  than  half  the 
cities  .  .  .  the  losses  .  .  .  have  been  made  good 
by  bondsmen.  .  .  .  No  expensive  public  works  have 
been  carried  on.  No  Governor  of  the  State  has  found  the 
cost  of  the  capitol  a  painful  subject  to  contemplate  in 
his  message.  There  is  no  State  canal,  no  Brooklyn  or  St. 
Louis  bridge,  no  Hoosac  tunnel,  no  Tweed  court-house, 
to  show  for  all  the  millions  added  to  the  debt  of  the  last 
decade.  I  believe  there  is  not  in  all  New  Jersey  a  city 
park  of  ten  acres  extent.  .  .  .  The  people  have  been 
taxed  to  the  limit  of  their  endurance,  in  some  cases  beyond 
it,  yet  the  burden  continues  to  increase.  .  .  .  Should 
another  business  revulsion  take  place,  the  number  of  bank- 
rupt cities  would  be  greatly  increased." 

After  this  picture,  Mr.  Corbin  stated  the  cause:  "  More 


234     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

than  one-fourth  the  property  of  the  State  is  exempt  from 
county  and  local  taxation.  That  exempted  property 
belongs  to  the  railroad  companies."  Estimating  at 
$250,000,000  the  value  of  this  exempt  railroad  property, 
Mr.  Corbin  showed  that  "  the  people  of  New  Jersey  were 
paying  an  annual  subsidy  of  $2,000,000  to  the  owners  of 
the  railroad  property  in  the  State ! " 

When  Governor  Ludlow  showed  himself  a  free  man,  this 
condition  was  brought  to  his  attention  by  Mr.  Corbin  and 
other  men  who  had  been  seeking  for  years  to  correct  it. 
The  Governor  urged  the  Legislature  to  take  it  up,  and 
bills  were  introduced.  The  Legislature,  with  "  Gardner 
of  Atlantic  "  presiding  over  the  Senate,  killed  these  bills, 
and  nothing  was  accomplished  in  Ludlow's  administration. 
The  question  was  up,  however;  the  railroads  had  had  to 
show  themselves  to  beat  it  off,  and  with  the  scandal  of 
"  Gardner  of  Atlantic's  "  little  bills,  to  illustrate  the  meth- 
ods of  the  roads,  the  American  citizen  had  the  sensation 
needed  to  excite  him  to  revolt. 

Jersey  was  so  excited  in  1883  that  both  parties  adopted 
platforms  pledging  their  candidates  to  tax  reform.  We 
all  know  what  railroad  platforms  are  for ;  in  this  railroad 
State  the  citizens  paid  little  heed  to  them ;  they  looked  to 
the  candidates.  A  Jersey  Governor  cannot  succeed  him- 
self, so  Ludlow  could  not  run.  The  Democrats  nominated 
Leon  Abbett,  the  Republicans  a  judge  on  the  bench.  Now, 
I  make  it  a  rule  not  to  criticise  the  courts,  but  some  lawyer 
should — and  the  place  to  go  first  for  the  facts  is  New  Jer- 
sey. The  judges  over  there  are  not  elected;  high  and  low, 
they  all  are  appointed  by  the  Governor.  Business  men  and 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      235 

lawyers  tell  me  that  is  the  way  to  insure  a  strong  bench. 
Rhode  Island  does  not  prove  this,  and  taking  up  one  by 
one  the  appointments  to  the  bench  in  Jersey,  tracing  the 
past  records  of  the  judges,  and  noting  the  decisions  that 
bore  on  my  work,  I  got  somehow  the  impression  that  those 
courts  were  part  of  the  Jersey  system.  As  a  layman,  I 
asked  corporation  lawyers  in  Wall  Street  for  their  opin- 
ion, and  I  heard  from  them  that  the  Jersey  bench  ranks 
among  the  very  best  State  courts  in  the  land.  So  I  should 
say  that  "  Jersey  justice  "  offers  a  fair  test.  Whatever 
was  found  to  be  true  there  might  be  accepted  with  confi- 
dence as  more  typical  than,  for  instance,  the  results  of  an 
investigation  in  Missouri. 

Whatever  may  be  said  of  the  bench  as  a  bench,  how- 
ever, I  feel  safe  in  this  generalization:  Judges  make  poor 
leaders  of  a  political  campaign.  They  are  not  democratic 
enough.  They  seem  to  put  too  much  faith  in  machinery, 
legal,  political,  social,  and  this  judge  whom  the  Republi- 
cans nominated  in  their  day  of  trouble  left  it  to  the  organ- 
ization to  make  him  Governor,  as  it  had  made  him  judge. 
As  he  said,  he  "  waited  where  he  was  "  in  dignified  silence 
for  the  office  and  the  people  to  come  to  him,  and,  while  he 
waited,  Leon  Abbett,  who  went  to  the  people,  was  elected. 

Abbett  had  to  go  to  the  people.  It  seems  to  me  that  this 
most  interesting  man  was  an  instinctive  democrat,  and 
would  naturally  have  campaigned  the  State,  county  by 
county,  as  he  did.  But  no  two  Jersey  witnesses  agree 
about  him  now  any  longer,  and  it  is  certain  that  when  he 
ran  for  Governor  he  was  forced  by  the  fury  of  the  attacks 
on  his  imperfect  record  to  fight  on  the  stump.  Besides  the 


236     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

Republican  party,  some  of  the  State  House  ring  of  his 
own  party,  and  most  of  the  big  interests  back  of  both  par- 
ties, were  against  him.  It  is  believed  that  the  Pennsyl- 
vania's Republican  machine  secretly  supported  him,  and 
he  was  an  old  Camden  and  Amboy  legislator.  But  he  was 
called  a  "  politician,"  a  "  demagogue,"  an  "  anarchist " ; 
and  I  find  that  "  business  "  reserves  these  bad  names  for 
men  who  are  brave  enough  to  challenge  and  able  enough 
to  beat  bad  business ;  and  that  was  Abbett.  There  was 
another  charge  against  the  man,  however:  ambition.  His 
enemies  said  he  cared  nothing  for  the  State;  which  was 
not  true ;  or  for  the  governorship,  which  was  partly  true. 
They  said  he  wanted  to  be  a  United  States  Senator,  and 
believed  that  by  taxing  the  railroads  he  could  achieve  his 
ambition.  Here  was  the  outrageous  truth,  I  guess :  Leon 
Abbett  was  one  of  those  "  unscrupulous  politicians  "  who 
want,  not  money,  but  office,  and  who  think  to  rise,  even  to 
the  United  States  Senate,  by  serving,  not  the  special,  but 
the  common  interests  of  the  State.  This  makes  the  man 
interesting  to  all  of  us;  his  career  was  an  experiment  in 
democracy. 

Abbett  did  tax  the  railroads.  He  did  not  tax  them  as 
they  should  be  taxed,  like  other  property,  but  there  is 
an  excuse  for  that  failure.  He  represented  the  people; 
the  Legislature  did  not.  The  American  people  too  com- 
monly depend  upon  one  man,  the  executive,  to  legislate  for 
them;  they  neglect  the  Legislature,  which  was  meant  to 
be  the  representative,  law-making  branch  of  the  govern- 
ment. The  result  is  such  typical  situations  as  that  of 
President  Roosevelt  and  the  Congress  to-day  (1905),  and 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      237 

of  Governor  Abbett  in  New  Jersey  in  1884.  The  President 
is  urging  a  law  granting  to  the  interstate  commerce  commis- 
sion power  to  regulate  railroad  rates ;  the  Jersey  Governor 
was  for  a  law  to  tax  private  and  railroad  property  on 
the  same  footing;  both  men  were  acting  for  the  common 
against  the  special  interests.  Now,  note  the  parallel  of 
their  experiences.  Abbett  had  an  equal-tax  bill  introduced 
in  the  Assembly,  and  it  was  called  the  "  Governor's  bill " ; 
just  as  the  rate  bill  introduced  in  the  House  of  Represen- 
tatives is  known  as  the  "  President's  bill."  Railroad  men 
rushed  to  Trenton  as  we  have  seen  them  rush  to  Washing- 
ton. Abbett  had  aroused  public  opinion,  however,  and  the 
railroads  could  not  make  their  assemblymen  stand  up. 
Like  the  House  of  Representatives,  the  Jersey  Assembly 
passed  the  "  Governor's  bill "  with  an  overwhelming  vote 
up  to  the  Senate.  That  is  as  far  as  the  President's  bill  has 
gone  up  to  this  writing,  but,  as  it  progresses,  see  if  the 
parallel  is  not  carried  out.  Public  opinion  in  Jersey  was 
such  that  even  the  Senators  were  alarmed.  They  must  do 
something.  When  the  special  interests  see  that  "  some 
legislation  "  is  necessary,  they  always  want  to  draw  the 
bill  themselves.  So,  the  Jersey  Senate  appointed  a  commit- 
tee, with  John  W.  Griggs  for  chairman;  hearings  were 
held;  the  railroads  appeared  (United  States  Senator 
Sewell  for  the  Pennsylvania),  and  they  pleaded  for  the 
sacred  rights  of  (their)  property,  and  the  inviolability 
(by  the  State)  of  their  contracts  with  the  State.  In  vain. 
Some  sort  of  a  bill  had  to  be  drawn.  So  the  committee  drew 
a  bill  taxing  the  railroads,  not  equally — they  were  to  be 
put  in  a  class  by  themselves — still  the  Griggs  bill  provided 


238     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

for  a  tax  on  railroads.  Some  of  the  railroad  men  objected 
even  to  this  compromise — "  Gardner  of  Atlantic,"  for  ex- 
ample. But  there  was  the  Governor's  bill  to  meet,  and  the 
Griggs  bill  was  introduced  to  meet  it.  There  was  a  dead- 
lock. The  railroads  used  all  their  power,  legitimate  and 
illegitimate ;  the  Governor  used  all  his,  legitimate  and  ille- 
gitimate— patronage,  vetoes,  even  a  threat  to  veto  the 
appropriation  bills.  It  was  no  use.  The  Griggs  bill  might 
be  passed,  not  the  Governor's.  As  the  session  drew  to  a 
close,  the  Governor  was  persuaded  to  take  "  half  a  loaf  " ; 
the  Griggs  bill  would  increase  by  about  $300,000  the 
revenue  of  the  State.  That  was  something.  The  Governor 
consented  to  make  terms  with  the  railroads.  In  the  current 
discussion  of  the  President's  rate-regulation  bill,  I  notice 
that  railroad  men  are  saying  that  they  would  not  mind  the 
regulation  so  much  if  only  they  could  have  a  "  better,"  a 
"  more  expert "  commission.  That  was  the  chief  point  in 
the  deal  between  Governor  Abbett  and  the  railroads  of  his 
State.  If  the  roads  must  be  taxed,  then  the  roads  must  do 
the  taxing.  If  laws  must  be  passed  against  special  inter- 
ests, special  interests  want  not  only  to  draw  the  laws,  but 
to  execute  them.  Abbett  won  the  present  railroad-tax  law 
of  New  Jersey  by  making  two  of  the  four  assessors  (Penn- 
sylvania) railroad  men. 

Some  of  the  roads,  left  out  of  the  final  deal,  resisted  the 
law,  but  Governor  Abbett  brought  them  to  terms.  The 
Jersey  Central  appealed  to  the  courts.  There  was  a  sus- 
picion abroad  that  the  law  had  been  drawn  to  be  ruled 
unconstitutional,  and,  when  the  Supreme  Court  so  held, 
the  comment  through  the  State  was  rather  excited.  This 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE     239 

tradition,  still  believed  but  unsupported  by  evidence,  goes 
on  to  relate  that  the  Governor  served  notice  on  the  roads 
that  if  the  law  was  not  upheld  on  appeal  he  would  "  equal- 
tax  "  them.  Anyhow,  the  Court  of  Appeals  did  reverse  the 
lower  court  and  declare  the  law  sound.  Even  then  the 
Delaware,  Lackawanna  and  Western  would  not  pay;  till 
the  Governor  discovered  that  this  road,  so  insistent  upon 
its  own  rights,  had  not  paid  even  the  taxes  it  admitted  it 
should  pay.  In  a  special  message,  the  Governor  declared 
that  the  Delaware,  Lackawanna  and  Western  (whose  pres- 
ident, by  the  way,  used  to  put  a  Bible  in  each  car)  had 
scaled  down  the  value  of  personal  property  and  equipment, 
in  twenty  years,  from  thirteen  to  three  millions,  and  that 
consequently  it  had  cheated  the  State  out  of  one  million 
dollars.  This  set  the  Legislature  in  motion  to  take  away 
its  charter,  and  the  road  offered  to  obey  the  new  law.  The 
Governor  demanded  now,  however,  those  arrears  of  taxes 
also,  and,  upon  the  decision  of  umpires  that  at  least 
$300,000  was  due,  this  "  loyally  grateful "  corporation 
performed  for  once  its  duty  to  the  State. 

Thus  did  Leon  Abbett  seize  as  Governor  the  powers  of 
the  Governor,  and  reassert  the  sovereignty  of  his  State, 
even  over  the  railroads.  This,  to  get  a  United  States  Sen- 
atorship.  Did  he  deserve  the  promotion?  He  was  not  a 
"  good  man,"  only  a  "  good  politician  " ;  he  "  dickered  " 
and  he  "  dealt " ;  to  pass  that  railroad  bill  he  used  all  the 
arts  of  his  profession,  save  only  cash  bribery,  and  he 
showed  himself  not  above  that,  for,  having  no  money,  he 
paid  out  public  offices ;  and  patronage  is  simply  bribery 
which  the  public  pays.  So  Governor  Abbett  was  not  the 


240     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

perfect  man  we  are  looking  for  to  give  us  good  govern- 
ment. Far  from  it;  personally,  Leon  Abbett  was  as  bad 
as  William  J.  Sewell.  But  Sewell  was  in  the  Senate;  in- 
deed, it  was  Sewell's  seat  that  Abbett  was  after;  and 
Sewell  had  got  it  because  he  was  bad.  Why,  then,  shouldn't 
Abbett  have  it?  What  was  the  difference? 

There  was  a  difference,  and  that  difference  beat  Abbett. 
What  was  it  ?  I  think  it  was  this :  while  Sewell  was  bad  in 
the  interest  of  "  business,"  Abbett  was  bad  in  the  interest 
of  the  State.  But  let  us  see:  there  were  other  differences 
between  these  two  men;  Sewell  was  a  Republican,  Abbett 
was  a  Democrat.  But  Sewell's  Jersey  colleague  in  the  Sen- 
ate at  that  time  was  John  R.  McPherson,  a  Democrat.  We 
have  seen  him  fighting  side  by  side  with  Sewell  for  the 
Pennsylvania  in  the  State  Senate;  and  all  Jersey  remem- 
bers a  certain  letter  which  a  certain  railroad  man  wrote  to 
Abram  S.  Hewitt,  a  director  of  the  Reading  (the  old 
National)  Railroad,  to  warn  him  of  a  conversation,  over- 
heard at  the  Continental  Hotel  in  Philadelphia,  in  which 
Sewell  and  McPherson  were  alleged  to  have  agreed,  since 
both  represented  the  Pennsylvania,  that  neither  should  fight 
for  his  own  party  when  the  other  was  up  for  reelection  to 
the  Senate.  That  is  to  say,  when  Sewell  (Rep.)  was  running 
for  his  seat,  McPherson  (Dem.)  was  to  let  the  Republicans 
carry  certain  doubtful  districts,  so  that  Sewell  (P.  R.  R.) 
could  go  to  Washington,  and  when  McPherson  (Dem.) 
was  running,  Sewell  (Rep.)  was  to  let  the  Democrats  carry 
certain  close  districts  which  the  "  road "  could  "  influ- 
ence," so  that  McPherson  (P.  R.  R.)  could  go  back. 

So  long  as  the  Senator  represented  the  Pennsylvania, 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE 

the  party  made  no  difference;  was  it  that?  Not  exactly. 
When  now  (1886)  Governor  Abbett  was  running  against 
Sewell,  the  Governor  saw  to  it  that  the  Democrats  made  a 
fight.  One  wing  of  the  party,  missing  the  railroad  "  back- 
ing," wanted  to  nominate  a  railroad  man  for  Governor, 
and,  since  the  Jersey  Central  was  angry,  not  only  at  the 
party  for  taxing  it,  but  at  the  Pennsylvania  for  having 
"  grabbed  "  for  itself  both  "  railroad  representatives  "  on 
the  tax  board,  the  railroad  Democrats  suggested  Rufus 
Blodgett,  superintendent  of  the  Long  Branch  division  of 
the  Central.  Abbett,  by  making  humiliating  concessions 
to  one  of  the  State  House  ring,  beat  Blodgett,  won  the 
nomination  for  his  man,  Robert  S.  Green,  and  with  "  Green 
for  Governor  "  the  Democrats  carried  the  election.  They 
had  on  joint  ballot  in  the  Legislature  a  majority,  narrow, 
but  sufficient  to  elect  a  Democrat  to  the  Senate — if  the 
voting  was  straight.  But  the  voting  could  not  be  straight, 
and  Sewell  had  hopes.  The  excitement  was  intense,  the 
scandal  was  sordid  and  loud.  Some  of  the  Democrats  were 
purchasable,  and  if  Sewell  had  had  the  solid  support  of 
his  party,  the  "  road  "  could  have  bought  back  his  seat 
for  him.  But,  just  as  the  dishonest  Democrats  made  Ab- 
bett's  election  doubtful,  so  some  honest  Republicans  made 
Sewell's  impossible.  They  would  not  vote  for  him.  There 
was  a  dead-lock.  Reluctantly,  Sewell  had  to  give  up.  It 
was  anybody  to  beat  Abbett.  The  railroad  Democrats  sent 
word  to  the  railroad  Republicans  that  they  were  ready  to 
unite,  but  only  on  a  Democrat.  The  railroad  Republicans 
asked  for  a  list  of  three  Democrats  to  choose  from.  The 
railroad  Democrats  furnished  a  list,  headed  by  Rufus 


242     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

Blodgett,  and  the  railroad  Republicans  took  him.  Thus 
was  Leon  Abbett  punished  by  the  System  which  sent  Rufus 
Blodgett  to  the  United  States  Senate. 

So  any  railroad  man  would  do ;  was  that  it  ?  Evidently 
Leon  Abbett  thought  so,  for,  bitterly  disappointed,  he  set 
about  getting  him  a  railroad.  The  Baltimore  and  Ohio,  a 
great  corruptionist  at  home,  was  coming  into  Jersey.  Un- 
der the  general  railway  law,  it  was  free  to  cross  the  State. 
But  a  bridge  over  the  Kills  to  Staten  Island  was  necessary, 
and  the  general  law  did  not  provide  for  bridges.  The  Legis- 
lature had  to  grant  a  special  permission  to  bridge  the  Kills, 
and  the  Pennsylvania  and  the  other  roads  objected.  The 
Legislature  was  theirs.  Abbett,  as  Governor,  had  favored 
this  further  "  development  of  the  resources  of  the  State," 
so  in  1889,  when  the  term  of  his  friend,  United  States  Sen- 
ator McPherson,  expired,  the  ex-Governor  went  after  his 
seat  with  Baltimore  and  Ohio  "  backing."  Abbett's  move- 
ments were  very  quiet,  and  McPherson  had  no  suspicion 
of  his  strength  till  the  Democratic  caucus  was  about  to 
meet.  Then  it  appeared  that  Abbett  had  a  majority. 
McPherson  rushed  forth  to  sound  an  alarm ;  the  chairman 
was  his,  and  the  meeting  was  held  up  while  the  McPherson 
and  Pennsylvania  agents  and  Miles  Ross  "  argued  "  with 
the  members.  Abbett's  Baltimore  and  Ohio  "  strength  " 
was  soon  exhausted,  and  McPherson  (P.  R.  R.  Dem.)  was 
reflected  to  the  Senate. 

So  a  United  States  Senatorship  represented  not  only 
money,  but  the  most  money ;  and  not  only  a  railroad,  but 
the  sovereign  railroads — the  organized  power  in  both  par- 
ties of  established  vested  interests.  Was  that  the  secret? 


NEW  JERSEY:  A  TRAITOR  STATE   2 

That  is  the  suspicion  which  I  have  gathered  in  other  States, 
where  it  has  seemed  that  the  United  States  Senate  must  be 
made  up  of  the  representatives  from  each  State,  not  of  the 
people,  not  even  of  the  State,  but  of  the  corrupt  system 
of  each  State.  This  would  account  for  much  that  happens 
in  the  Senate,  and  it  is  pretty  clear  that  Leon  Abbett  saw 
it  so.  For  this  remarkable  man,  undaunted  by  two  defeats, 
still  pursued  his  ambition.  He  fixed  his  eyes  on  the  seat 
Rufus  Blodgett  would  vacate  four  years  hence,  and  to  win 
it  the  ex-Governor  proceeded  with  the  organization  of  his 
political  machine,  the  establishment  of  a  vested  interest, 
and  the  creation  of  a  System,  all  his  own. 

During  Abbett's  term  and  that  of  Governor  Green  the 
Jersey  Democrats  did  what  the  Pennsylvania  Republicans 
had  done  twenty  years  before:  they  gerrymandered  the 
State.  The  grafters  had  long  ago  learned  how,  by  divid- 
ing cities  and  towns  into  classes,  they  could  evade  the  con- 
stitutional amendment  adopted  to  prevent  special  legisla- 
tion, and  the  Abbett  organization  now  used  their  Legisla- 
ture to  legislate  the  Republicans  out  and  themselves  into 
control  of  local  governments.  This  was  to  strengthen  their 
party,  and,  for  the  sake  of  the  "  strength,"  the  local 
leaders  had  to  be  allowed  to  loot  their  localities,  of  course ; 
a  machine  has  to  be  built  from  the  ground  up. 

But  a  machine,  to  become  a  system,  must  have  a  vested 
interest.  The  Republicans  had  made  one  that  just  suited 
the  Democrats.  It  seems  that  when  the  Democrats,  with 
their  "  anti-railroad  demagogy,"  had  won  the  plain  people, 
the  Republicans  felt  the  need  of  "  popular  support."  The 
Prohibitionists  had  developed  a  vote  of  some  20,000,  which 


244     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

was  more  than  the  normal  difference  between  the  two  par- 
ties. So  the  Republicans  had  drawn  a  local  (county)  high- 
license  bill,  which,  with  the  Prohibitionists,  the  clergy,  and 
the  "  good  people  "  helping,  they  had  passed  through  the 
Legislature  of  1888.  The  effect  of  this  legislation  was 
startling.  It  brought  about  "  bad  government "  in  New 
Jersey. 

"  Good  "  laws  commonly  make  for  "  bad  "  government, 
and  good  people  wonder  why.  They  may  see  now.  Before 
this  local-option  law  was  passed  the  liquor  interest  had  not 
been  very  active  in  politics ;  and  under  the  law,  the  people 
beat  them  county  by  county ;  prohibition  was  voted  for  all 
over  the  State.  This  satisfied  the  good  people,  and  they 
retired  from  politics.  But,  just  as  governmental  grants  of 
privilege  force  good  men  into  politics  to  protect  their  "  bus- 
iness," so  governmental  prohibitions  drive  vicious  business 
men  into  politics  to  save  their  business.  The  prohibition 
law  aroused  the  liquor  interest ;  as  the  people  withdrew,  the 
saloons  entered  the  game;  and  while  the  good  people  were 
rejoicing  over  the  "  good  government "  victories  in  the 
counties,  the  "  bad  men  "  went  out  for  representative  gov- 
ernment in  the  State.  And  they  went  about  it  in  the  right 
way.  They  wanted  a  party  to  represent  them.  Since  the 
Republicans  represented  the  "  good "  people,  the  "  bad 
people  "  joined  the  Democrats.  Leon  Abbett  was  the  Demo- 
cratic leader.  They  made  him  attorney  for  their  Liquor 
Dealers'  Association.  He  wanted  to  be  Governor  again. 
He  wanted  the  office,  as  before,  only  to  get  a  United  States 
Senatorship,  but  they  didn't  inquire  into  his  motives.  He 
represented  them,  and  that  was  all  they  asked ;  they  backed 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      245 

him  and  his  party.  They  elected  a  Legislature,  which  repre- 
sented them ;  the  party  was  timid  lest  the  people  should  re- 
sent out-and-out  repeal  of  the  prohibition  law,  so  the  high- 
license  clause  was  retained ;  but  local  option  was  "  fixed." 
Now  see  how  the  good  citizens  played  into  the  hands  of 
the  bad.  Even  after  this  victory  the  liquor  interest  did  not 
go  home.  It  stayed  in  politics.  Leon  Abbett  had  uses  for 
it,  and  in  1889  it  helped  elect  him  Governor  again,  with 
a  Legislature  solidly  Democratic  for  the  first  time  in  ten 
years.  He  was  a  changed  man.  He  was  a  boss.  Having 
learned  (I  understand  that  he  said  once  privately)  that  by 
representing  the  people  he  could  not  rise  in  a  government 
that  represented  railroad  and  business  corruption,  he  had 
accepted  the  support  of  "  criminal  corruption."  The  cost 
to  Jersey  was  terrible.  With  the  liquor  interest  had  come 
all  that  low  following  of  vice  that  the  saloons  collect. 
These  interests,  by  "  work  "  and  by  fraud  at  the  polls, 
practically  controlled  the  Legislature,  which  they  turned 
over  to  the  Governor.  They  delivered  into  his  hands  all 
power:  appointments,  public  institutions,  the  liquor  licens- 
ing boards,  the  State  militia,  a  State  police,  local  and 
county  offices  and  boards ;  those  legislators  even  resigned 
legislation  to  him,  passing  his  bills  and  adjourning  with 
them  in  his  hands  to  sign  or  veto,  as  he  would.  In  return, 
Governor  Abbett  had  to  let  the  government  represent 
crime  and  vice,  and  it  did.  That  was  the  beginning  of  the 
race-track  scandals  of  Jersey.  There  was  a  race-track 
at  Monmouth,  others  sprang  up,  one  at  Gloucester  for 
Philadelphia,  another  at  Guttenberg  for  New  York,  and 
when  the  railroads  (and  the  Western  Union)  saw  that  the 


246     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

betting  vice  made  traffic,  they  encouraged  the  location  of 
tracks  in  small  towns  along  their  lines.  With  the  "  sport  " 
came  gamblers,  prostitution,  and  all  that  goes  with  racing 
and  liquor  politics.  Jersey  became  a  veritable  Tenderloin 
State. 

No  matter,  Leon  Abbett,  hardened  now,  sullen  and  de- 
termined, had  a  "  vested  interest  "  with  him.  He  was  pretty 
sure  of  election  to  the  United  States  Senate,  but  to  make 
doubly  sure  he  reached  for  another,  a  more  respectable, 
interest,  the  railroads.  A  group  of  these  roads,  the  Jersey 
Central,  the  Lehigh  and  Susquehanna,  the  Philadelphia 
and  Reading  (and,  is  was  believed,  the  Delaware  and  Hud- 
son, and  the  Delaware,  Lackawanna  and  Western) ,  planned 
a  combination  to  control  the  output  and  price  of  coal. 
Seeing  that  vice,  not  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad,  was 
ruling  the  State,  they  made  overtures  to  Abbett  and  his 
party.  And  since  the  Republicans  had  the  Pennsylvania 
behind  them,  the  Democrats  were  glad  of  the  chance  to 
get  the  other  roads  into  their  party.  The  "  Coal  Com- 
bine "  bill  was  passed.  The  Pennsylvania  opposed  it,  and 
the  newspapers  all  over  the  country  fought  the  new 
monopoly ;  but  Abbett  pushed  it,  and  the  bill,  made  a  party 
measure,  was  put  through. 

And  all  this  also  to  get  a  United  States  Senatorship! 
Did  Leon  Abbett  get  it?  He  did  not.  Then  why  not? 
Because  he  flinched ;  when  it  came  to  the  final  test  he  rep- 
resented, not  the  System,  not  even  his  System,  but  the 
State  of  New  Jersey.  When  that  Legislature  adjourned, 
leaving  in  his  hands  that  "  Coal  Combine  "  bill  for  which 
he  had  himself  used  the  whip,  public  opinion,  both  in  the 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE 

nation  and  in  the  State,  continued  to  clamor  against  it, 
and  Leon  Abbett,  the  demagogue,  hearkened,  hesitated, 
and — he  vetoed  the  bill.  This  embittered  the  railroads  and 
the  politicians  and  legislators  "  in  on  the  deal."  They 
wanted  to  get  even.  He  had,  likewise  after  adjournment, 
refused  to  sign  a  race-track  bill  which  aroused  public 
opposition.  This  had  embittered  the  vice  interests,  and 
they  also  wanted  to  get  even.  He  was  too  powerful  to  fight 
while  he  was  Governor,  and  the  Coal  Combine  which  tried 
it  and  undertook  to  complete  the  deal  without  his  sanction, 
was  held  up  by  his  attorney  general,  taken  into  court,  and, 
after  a  famous  fight,  was  forced  by  a  famous  decision  of 
Chancellor  McGill  to  disband — till  times  were  better. 

But  when  Abbett,  no  longer  Governor,  came  into  the 
caucus  of  his  party  in  1893  to  ask  for  his  reward,  every- 
body "  got  even."  All  "  interests  "  were  against  him. 
Some  of  them  pretended  to  be  for  him,  and  there  was 
money  back  of  him ;  votes  were  bought  for  him ;  yes,  that 
Senatorship  was  bought  as  for  him.  But  the  money  was 
not  Abbett's  own,  and  the  men  to  whom  it  belonged,  the 
men  who  owned  the  votes,  cast  them  for  James  Smith,  Jr., 
Abbett's  right-hand  man,  and  one  of  the  lieutenants  who 
managed  his  campaign  for  the  Senatorship.  As  for  Leon 
Abbett,  he  soon  died. 

I  often  hear  American  citizens  say  that  the  national 
government  is  "  all  right — if  only  the  cities  could  be 
governed  as  well."  How  can  the  national  government  be 
good?  The  System  is  all  one  thing.  In  every  State  where 
I  have  been  I  have  noticed  that  the  men  who  have  tried  to 
serve  the  State  were  punished.  In  New  Jersey  the  pursuit 


STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

of  poor  old  Governor  Ludlow  is  an  oft-told  tale ;  the  failure 
of  Leon  Abbett  is  a  ringing  moral  lesson  to  Jersey  poli- 
ticians. Both  were  made  Supreme  Court  judges,  but  late, 
after  their  lives  had  been  embittered  and  their  failures 
plain.  And  as  the  System  punishes,  so  does  it  reward. 
We  have  been  in  at  the  birth  of  several  United  States 
Senators,  so  we  can  begin,  if  we  are  honest,  to  realize  that 
that  august  chamber  is  the  earthly  heaven  of  traitors. 
But  Senatorships  are  not  the  only  federal  reward  of — the 
System.  We  have  noted  that  Hobart  became  a  Vice-Presi- 
dent, Miles  Ross  a  Congressman ;  but  let  me  give  you  just 
as  I  got  it,  for  once,  one  of  the  impressions  I  am  getting 
all  over  the  country.  Several  times  in  the  course  of  this 
story  I  have  mentioned,  without  comment  or  explanation, 
a  certain  "  Gardner  of  Atlantic."  I  did  not  do  this  to 
mystify ;  that  was  the  way  I  heard  of  the  man.  Time  and 
time  again,  after  listening  to  some  Jerseyman's  tale  of  a 
bad  bill  intrpduced,  a  good  bill  held  up,  a  railroad  deal  put 
through,  or  an  effort  of  protesting  citizens  balked,  I  would 
ask,  "  Who  did  it  ?  "  Time  and  time  again  the  answer 
was,  "  Gardner  of  Atlantic."  The  name  meant  nothing  to 
me ;  I  made  no  note  of  it  and  inquired  no  further,  till  one 
day  in  exasperation  I  exclaimed :  "  Who  is  this  Gardner  of 
Atlantic  ?  And  where  is  he  now  ?  " 

My  Jerseyman  was  astonished.  "  Gardner  of  Atlantic !  " 
he  said.  "  Haven't  you  come  across  him  before?  Why, 
that  is  John  J.  Gardner,  the  Congressman ! " 

"  Oh,"  I  said,  and,  since  I  have  in  mind  to  study  some 
day  the  National  government,  I  put  Gardner  down  in  my 
long  list  of  "  gone  to  the  House."  But  while  I  was  writing 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE     249 

these  pages  (1905)  the  vote  on  the  "  President's  "  rate  bill 
was  taken,  and  I  looked  for  Gardner.  That  vote  was  326 
ayes,  17  noes.  Among  the  17  was  "  Gardner  (Rep.  N.  J.)." 
Some  of  my  critics  have  found  fault  with  me,  mildly, 
for  seeking  only  the  evil  in  men ;  others,  much  more  indig- 
nantly, have  said  I  looked  too  eagerly  for  the  good  and 
made  heroes  of  men  who  palpably  have  human  weaknesses. 
My  criterion  and  that  of  my  critics  are  not  the  same, 
evidently.  I  don't  know  what  theirs  is,  but  mine  is  simple. 
I  ask  of  a  representative,  What  does  he  represent?  "  Gard- 
ner of  Atlantic  "  may  be  an  honest  man ;  he  certainly  has 
the  courage  of  his  conviction ;  but  he  is  not  "  Rep.  N.  J.' ; 
he  is  P.  R.  R.  I  prefer  Leon  Abbett,  defeated,  to  all  the 
Gardners  in  Congress,  because  in  his  practical,  compro- 
mising crooked  Jersey  way,  he  did  sometimes  represent 
New  Jersey,  and  because,  though  dead  and  buried,  he  is 
still  the  livest  Democrat  in  that  State  to-day.  For  the 
consequences  of  his  career  have  lived  on;  much  of  both 
the  good  and  the  bad  in  Jersey  can  be  traced  to  him,  as 
we  shall  see,  and,  as  we  shall  also  see,  the  effects  of  his 
influence  have  spread  all  over  the  United  States.  Leon 
Abbett  adopted  the  charter-giving  policy  of  New  Jersey. 
That  hurts  us,  but  Abbett  didn't  care  about  us.  He  was 
for  Jersey.  That  was  his  great  limitation.  When  the 
national  press  was  imploring  him  to  veto  the  "  coal  com- 
bine "  bill,  lest  it  put  up  the  price  of  coal  for  the  whole 
country,  Abbett  snapped  his  fingers  at  that  argument. 
He  vetoed  the  bill,  as  he  said,  because  while  he  had  made  a 
bargain  with  the  combine  to  except  New  Jersey  and  ensure 
her  cheap  coal,  there  was  no  way  to  make  that  exception 


250     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

binding.   So  we,  the  whole  people,  owe  Abbett  no  tears.  He 
was  for  Jersey.   He  was  Jersey  typified. 

The  live  Jerseymen  don't  care  either  how  much  the  Jer- 
sey trusts  hurt  us.  They  take  the  same  view  of  them  that 
Abbett  did ;  they  are  good  for  Jersey,  and  they  bless  him 
for  them.  "  But,"  they  told  me,  a  hundred  of  them, 
"  Abbett  gave  us  bad  government."  He  did.  He  left  his 
party  machine  so  reorganized  and  so  strong  that  in  the 
next  Democratic  administration  (that  of  a  Govenor  named 
Werts),  the  Legislature  represented  municipal  and  county 
rings  and  the  race-tracks.  William  J.  Thompson,  owner 
of  the  Gloucester  track,  and  better  known  as  the  "  Duke 
of  Gloucester,"  was  an  assemblyman  from  Camden;  Car- 
roll of  Hudson  was  a  bookmaker  at  the  Guttenberg  track ; 
there  were  many  more  such  men,  but  the  character  of  that 
body  may  be  summed  up  in  this  fact :  the  Speaker  of  the 
House  was  Thomas  Flynn,  the  starter  of  Thompson's 
races.  The  race  tracks  could  have  any  legislation  they 
wanted,  but  they  didn't  want  much.  Abbett's  veto  of  the 
bills  legalizing  all  kinds  of  racing  anywhere  had  proved 
of  advantage.  The  governments  of  racing  counties  repre- 
sented the  tracks,  and  neither  the  police  nor  the  local 
magistrates  would  enforce  the  law,  which  served,  there- 
fore, only  to  keep  out  more  tracks  and  maintain  the  vice 
monopoly.  They  passed  such  as  they  desired,  and  for  the 
rest  they  looted  the  State.  These  creatures  stole  the  very 
chairs  they  sat  on.  This  is  "  bad  government."  This  is 
what  your  average  American  citizen  means  by  "  bad  gov- 
ernment," and  it  is  disgusting.  But  it  isn't  dangerous. 
It  is  no  more  dangerous  in  a  State  than  in  a  city,  and  as  I 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      251 

have  often  remarked  before,  even  Tammany  in  New  York 
has  seen  that  theft  and  police  blackmail  are  bad  politics. 

The  government  in  New  Jersey  was  too  bad.  It  was  too 
bad  to  last.  It  became  obvious,  noisy,  a  stench,  so  that 
even  "  good  citizens  "  could  see  and  hear  and  smell  it. 
They  protested  for  a  while,  which  is  foolish ;  the  grafters 
don't  mind  protests.  By  and  by,  when  the  race-track 
legislators  fell  to  quarreling  over  the  spoils  and  passed 
laws  against  one  another,  the  scandal  was  such  that  the 
citizens  were  driven  to  the  polls.  They  voted  in  1893 
against  the  racing  rings,  and  their  votes  settled  the  crim- 
inal grafters. 

But  what  did  they  vote  for?  What  could  they  vote  for? 
The  people  of  New  Jersey  had  no  party  that  represented 
them.  They  had  to  vote  for  the  Republicans.  This  party 
represents  the  railroads  and  big  graft,  but  when  its  lead- 
ers saw  the  people  coming  they  nominated  a  "  good  man," 
John  W.  Griggs,  for  Governor,  on  a  reform  platform, 
and  they  "  exposed  "  the  Democratic  (petty)  larceny  by 
way  of  text  for  campaign  speeches.  Thus  they  "  caught 
the  honest  vote,"  and  thus,  at  last,  the  State  of  New  Jersey 
was  turned  over  to  the  Republican  party,  which  delivered 
it  up  to  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad.  The  conquest  of  New 
Jersey  was  complete.  Governor  Griggs  was  appointed 
Attorney  General  in  the  President's  Cabinet.  General 
Sewell  perfected  his  organization,  and  sent  himself  back 
to  the  United  States  Senate.  He  treated  the  other  rail- 
roads "  right  " ; — the  coal  combine  is  a  fact.  The  Penn- 
sylvania was  fair  to  all  "  interests."  True,  the  race  tracks 
were  driven  out,  but  the  liquor  men  are  quiet,  prosperous, 


252     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

and  contented.  Even  the  "  Democratic  Party  "  is  satis- 
fied. There  is  graft,  of  course,  plenty  of  it;  for  the  most 
part,  however,  the  corruption  is  orderly,  respectable,  dig- 
nified "  business."  That  is  bad,  but  it  is  not  "  bad  govern- 
ment." The  Pennsylvania  rules  and  the  government  rep- 
resents "  the  "  road,  the  other  roads,  and  some  other  inter- 
ests ;  but  the  syndicate  that  runs  the  State  for  the  foreign 
corporations  gives  Jerseymen  good  government,  or,  at 
least,  what  they  tell  me  is  "  pretty  good  government." 

"  Oh,"  they  say,  "  there  are  some  passing  evils  in 
the  counties,  but  in  the  State  we  have  pretty  good 
government." 

"  Good  government "  is  the  falsest  beacon  in  American 
politics.  I  have  seen  the  cities  sail  by  it,  and  I  know.  New 
Jersey  has  sailed  by  it  since  1895,  and  I  think  I  can  show 
in  the  next  article  that  the  "  passing  evils  "  the  Jersey- 
men  speak  of  in  their  counties  are  the  vestiges  of  the 
wreck  of  their  own  citizenship ;  and  that  the  "  good  "  they 
point  to  with  pride  in  their  State  is  their  share  of  the 
plunder  of  our  business  pirates  who  buy,  cheap,  her  letters 
of  marque,  to  prey  not  only  on  American  business,  but  on 
American  character,  and,  when  caught  at  their  crimes, 
sail  for  her  ports  to  purchase,  cheap,  legislative  immunity 
from  our  laws.  Jersey  shows,  plainer  than  any  other  State 
or  city,  how  we  are  all  betraying  one  another,  and  that 
what  we  Americans  lack  is  what  the  poor  Russians  are 
asking  their  Czar  for — representative  government;  not 
good  government,  not  reforms,  not  privileges,  not  advan- 
tages over  one  another,  but  fair  play  all  around,  and,  be- 
fore the  law,  equality. 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE 

PART     II.— THE     BETRAYAL:    SHOWING     HOW     THIS 
BOUGHT     STATE     SOLD     OUT     THE     UNITED 
STATES  TO  THE  TRUSTS   FOR  MONEY 
(May,  1905) 

A  SCHEME  "  to  make  New  Jersey  a  Mecca  for  Corpora- 
tions "  was  proposed  in  these  terms  to  the  Governor  of 
that  State,  in  the  summer  of  1890,  by  a  corporation  lawyer 
of  New  York.  There  is  no  doubt  about  the  man:  he  was 
James  B.  Dill,  now  known  as  the  author  of  "  Dill  on  Cor- 
porations." There  is  no  doubt  about  the  year,  and,  as  for 
the  season,  "  it  must  have  been  in  the  summer  time,  because 
the  Governor  sat  in  his  shirt  sleeves."  The  only  question 
is  whether  this  was  the  beginning.  It  was — of  the  business. 
Jersey's  liberality  to  corporations  is  as  old  as  Jersey,  and 
Mr.  Dill  was  not  the  first  New  York  lawyer  to  go  over  there 
with  corporation  schemes.  Alexander  Hamilton  (1800) 
headed  a  long  procession.  But  Mr.  Dill  did  not  know  all 
this.  He  lived  in  Jersey,  but  he  was  a  commuter.  He 
thought  he  was  proposing  something  new  to  Jersey,  and 
he  was,  in  a  way ;  his  proposition  was  to  put  the  State 
regularly  into  the  business  of  incorporating  business  com- 
panies ;  it  was  not  merely  to  let  business  sneak  over  there 
for  charters  now  and  then,  but  to  open  up  the  State  as  a 
sort  of  wholesale  charter  factory  and  advertise  the  indus- 
try in  a  business-like  way. 

253 


254     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

It  was  not  a  bad  scheme,  not  as  he  conceived  it.  Mr. 
Dill  was  a  young  man.  His  practice  was  small;  large 
enough  to  open  his  eyes  to  the  troubles  of  corporations, 
small  enough  to  leave  him  time  to  go  far  afield  in  his 
reading.  He  had  been  following  a  series  of  articles  on 
the  rise  of  business  companies  in  England,  and  the  advan- 
tages of  the  joint-stock  arrangement  over  the  old  copart- 
nership came  to  him  like  a  discovery.  Mr.  Dill  believed 
that  what  had  reached  the  dimensions  of  a  movement, 
almost  of  a  fashion,  in  England,  was  under  way  in  the 
United  States.  Why  not  promote  it?  Public  opinion  here 
was  against  "  monopolies  "  and  "  trusts,"  but  Mr.  Dill 
was  no  theorist.  He  was  a  young  American  lawyer  out 
for  business,  and  he  realized  that  the  lawyer  who  had  a 
hand  in  drafting  laws  favoring  corporations  could  hardly 
fail  to  become  an  authority  on  corporation  law — with  a 
large  practice.  Just  about  that  time  many  of  our  Legisla- 
tures were  passing  laws  to  discourage  the  growth  of  cor- 
porations. But  what  did  that  matter?  English  legislation 
encouraged  the  business.  Mr.  Dill  was  a  Connecticut 
Yankee,  astute,  jolly,  energetic,  and  he  set  out  with  his 
scheme  to  pass  English  laws  for  American  corporations 
and  to  make  himself  "  Dill  on  Corporations." 

How?  By  writing  articles,  making  speeches,  and  ap- 
pealing to  public  opinion?  No.  Mr.  Dill  was  a  practical 
man.  He  went  to  the  bosses.  He  put  his  scheme  in  shape 
and  offered  it  first  to  the  rulers  of  the  State  of  New  York. 
That  was  where  his  practice  was,  and  that  was  where  busi- 
ness centered.  The  New  York  corporation  laws  were  bad 
— bad,  I  mean,  for  corporations ;  they  were  antiquated, 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      255 

complicated,  and  rather  strict.  Moreover,  operations 
under  them  were  subject  to  all  sorts  of  "  political  graft- 
ing." Now,  lawyers  and  business  men  are  not  unreasonable 
about  paying  for  what  they  want,  but  they  like  "  fixed 
charges,"  and  New  York  had,  and  has,  a  most  annoying 
system  of  variable  taxes  and  miscellaneous  feeing.  From 
court  stenographers  and  departmental  clerks  all  along 
the  line,  through  referees  and  assessors,  up  to  legislators 
and  bosses,  it  is  tip,  tip,  tip — all  the  time.  Mr.  Thomas 
C.  Platt,  when  he  was  boss,  simplified  legislative  business, 
but  progress  elsewhere  always  had  been  like  a  trip  abroad ; 
you  needed  a  guide  to  tell  you  where  to  tip  and  when  you 
were  through.  For  example,  a  lawyer,  lacking  experience, 
was  changing  the  name  of  a  corporation.  This  was  a  sim- 
ple matter,  and  he  thought  he  had  "  seen "  that  all 
arrangements  were  made.  There  was  delay,  he  waited, 
then  inquired.  The  official  said  "  it  was  all  right,  and 
everything  would  be  ready  in  a  few  months."  A  few 
months !  The  lawyer  drew  the  fellow  aside.  "  I  want  those 
papers  to-morrow  morning,"  he  said ;  "  how  much  will  that 
cost  ?  "  That  cost  only  about  forty  dollars,  but  think  of 
the  bother ! 

When  young  Mr.  Dill  laid  his  great  scheme  before  his 
bosses  and  mine  he  explained  how  all  this  graft  would  be 
wiped  out.  Taxes  would  be  made  certain,  charges  by  the 
State  would  be  fixed,  and  stated  fees  would  go  to  named 
officials.  It  was  beautiful,  but  it  left  the  bosses  cold.  They 
could  see  the  advantage  to  the  State  and  to  business,  but 
they  could  not  see,  first,  why  they  should  deprive  their  office- 
holders of  all  the  good  old  graft,  nor,  second,  where  they, 


256     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

the  bosses,  "  came  in."  New  York  has  regretted  this  blind- 
ness since  and  has  begun  to  adopt  the  scheme,  but  only 
recently  and — late.  New  Jersey  got  it  then. 

Jersey  at  that  time  was  opening  wide  to  everything  bad. 
Leon  Abbett  was  Governor.  He  was  an  ambitious  man. 
He  long  had  wanted  to  go  to  the  United  States  Senate, 
and,  to  get  there,  he  had,  during  his  first  term  as  Governor, 
listened  to  a  popular  demand  for  a  tax  on  the  Pennsylvania 
and  other  railroads  which  ruled  the  State.  The  railroads 
were  exempt,  by  the  terms  of  their  charters,  from  taxa- 
tion, but  when  they  pleaded  the  inviolability  of  those 
ancient  charters  as  sacred  contracts,  this  man,  this  poli- 
tician, said :  "  All  right,  then,  we'll  tax  these  charters.  If 
they  are  a  contract,  and  if  that  contract  is  irrepealable, 
it  is  a  pretty  valuable  piece  of  property  itself;  we'll  tax 
that."  Leon  Abbett  was  an  awfully  bad  man.  The  rail- 
roads beat  him  when  he  ran  for  the  Senate  at  the  close  of 
his  first  term,  but  he  was  so  unscrupulous  that,  convinced 
of  the  impossibility  of  reaching  the  Senate  by  serving  the 
people  of  his  State,  he  set  about  building  him  a  system. 
He  organized  the  Democratic  party  into  a  grafting  ma- 
chine. He  accepted  the  support  of  the  liquor  interests, 
of  the  race  tracks,  and  even  of  some  of  the  railroads.  He 
had  himself  elected  Governor,  and  now,  in  1890,  the  first 
year  of  his  second  term,  he  was  making  of  Jersey  a  Ten- 
derloin of  interstate  vice. 

This,  then,  was  the  situation  when  our  young  lawyer, 
rebuffed  in  New  York,  looked  around  for  some  place  to 
go  to  do  what  he  was  not  allowed  to  do  at  home.  He  did 
not  know  Abbett ;  he  did  not  understand  the  conditions  in 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      257 

Jersey.  He  only  lived  there.  Mr.  Dill  went  to  Jersey  with 
his  scheme,  as  Alexander  Hamilton  did  with  his,  simply 
because  the  State  was  convenient.  And  Jersey  received 
him,  as  she  receives  all,  because  for  a  hundred  years  she 
has  trafficked  on  her  convenience.  The  State  gave  the 
young  successor  of  Hamilton  a  welcome  commensurate 
with  the  price  he  had  to  offer,  and  Mr.  Dill  had  a  good 
price  to  offer.  His  experience  with  the  New  York  grafters 
had  matured  the  young  man.  He  had  come  to  realize  that 
if  he  hoped  to  interest  men  in  his  scheme  he  must  be  able 
to  show  them  where  they  "  came  in."  About  that  time  he 
heard  how  the  Secretary  of  State  of  West  Virginia  was 
in  town,  at  the  Fifth  Avenue  Hotel,  where,  with  the  great 
seal  of  his  State  by  his  side,  he  was  displaying  the  liber- 
ality of  his  laws  and  selling  charters — for  fees.  That  was 
the  idea.  Mr.  Dill  seized  upon  it,  and  when  he  went  to 
Jersey  (in  all  fairness  to  the  New  York  bosses  this  should 
be  noted  well)  his  scheme  was  immensely  improved.  It 
provided  now  for  all;  that  is  to  say,  for  all,  excepting 
only  the  United  States. 

But  in  this  exception  lay  Point  One  of  the  scheme: 
With  the  United  States  as  a  nation  of  men  and  women 
up  in  arms  against  trusts,  there  was  need  of  a  State  where 
public  opinion  was  conservative.  With  "  demagogic  "  leg- 
islators in  Congress,  and  in  most  of  the  States,  passing 
laws  expressive  of  the  public  will,  there  was  a  demand  for 
a  State  Legislature  that  would  enact  the  will  of  the  cor- 
porations. With  business  men  everywhere  forming  pools, 
and  trusts,  and  gentlemen's  agreements  to  break  the  law 
or  to  get  around  it,  and  failing  because,  though  there  were 


258     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

trustees  there  was  no  trust,  and  while  there  were  agree- 
ments, there  were  so  few  gentlemen — with  all  these  diffi- 
culties abounding  in  the  Union,  there  was  money  in  it  for 
the  State  that  would  throw  down  her  sister  States  and 
give  a  license  to  business  to  do  business  just  as  business 
pleased ;  lawfully,  widely,  with  a  Legislature  to  defeat  the 
general  public  will,  and  courts  to  compel  private,  corpor- 
ate good  faith. 

Now,  this  is  my  statement  of  the  case,  not  Jersey's,  nor 
Wall  Street's,  nor  Mr.  Dill's.  They  hold  that  corporations 
are  inevitable  and  good,  and  I  don't  contradict  them. 
Mr.  Dill  says  that  he  had  in  mind  many  small  companies, 
not  the  few  big  trusts ;  he  did  not  foresee  all  of  the  future ; 
and  I  believe  him,  for  he  is  openly  against  some  of  the 
recent  developments  of  Jersey's  corporation  legislation. 
All  that  is  maintained  here  is  that  the  men  concerned  at 
that  time  in  the  adoption  of  the  Dill  scheme  "  didn't  care 
a  whoop  "  what  might  result,  and  what  the  other  States 
might  think,  or  feel,  or  wish.  They  were  out  for  them- 
selves and  Jersey.  Some  of  them  told  me  so.  But  let  us 
follow  the  facts. 

'When  Mr.  Dill,  contemplating  his  descent  upon  Jersey, 
inquired  who  the  bosses  were  over  there,  he  was  referred 
to  Governor  Abbett.  Mr.  Dill  didn't  know  enough,  then, 
to  be  surprised  that  the  head  of  a  State  and  the  Governor 
thereof  should  be  one  and  the  same  man.  He  was  much 
more  taken  aback  to  be  directed  from  the  capitol  at  Tren- 
ton to  the  Governor's  law  office  in  New  York,  but  he  went 
there ;  and  there,  to  the  Governor  "  in  his  shirt  sleeves," 
he  showed  how  Jersey,  by  granting  licenses  to  business  to 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      259 

do  what  other  States  were  trying  to  forbid,  might  become 
the  Mecca  of  corporations  and  make  an  enormous  revenue. 
Governor  Abbett  was  interested.  Leon  Abbett  was  inter- 
ested in  anything  that  would  increase  the  revenue  of  his 
State.  That  was  the  backbone  of  his  original  policy ; 
that  was  why  he  had  taxed  the  railroads  and,  by  the  way, 
the  franchises  of  corporations  also.  And,  as  for  the  cost 
to  the  other  States,  Abbett  was  not  the  man  to  scruple  at 
that.  I  tried  to  bring  out  in  the  first  Jersey  article  how 
Abbett,  with  all  his  faults,  rose  head  and  shoulders  above 
all  other  Jersey  politicians  in  this,  that  he  did,  in  his 
crooked,  unscrupulous,  Jersey  way,  sometimes  represent 
his  State.  And  in  a  nation  where  the  average  citizen  is  out 
for  his  own  pocket  all  the  time ;  where  the  average  reformer 
is  for  his  county  or  his  city;  where  the  noblest  cry  is  for 
municipal  reform;  where  good  citizenship  implies  a  will- 
ingness to  let  the  States  go  to  the  deuce,  if  only  local  gov- 
ernment is  not  too  bad — in  contrast  with  this  sort  of 
parochial  patriotism,  the  appearance  of  a  man  who  has  a 
sense  of  the  State,  of  a  whole  State,  city  and  county  and 
country,  too,  is  a  phenomenon.  Leon  Abbett  was  a  phe- 
nomenon. But,  rare  as  it  is  in  these  days,  the  State-sense 
is  not  enough ;  and  Leon  Abbett  proves  that.  He  was  for 
Jersey ;  he  was  Jersey  personified.  Out  of  loyalty  to  Jer- 
sey, the  selfish,  her  best  man  betrayed  the  United  States — 
to  help  him  get  into  the  United  States  Senate. 

Governor  Abbett  then,  thinking  only  of  Jersey  and  the 
Senate,  hearkened  to  the  voice  of  the  young  corporation 
lawyer  of  New  York,  who  was  thinking  of  the  corporations 
and  his  practice,  and  there  was  no  one  there  to  think  of  the 


260     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

rest  of  us.  Abbett  saw  that  the  scheme  was  good,  but  what 
more  could  Jersey  do  for  the  corporations?  They  already 
were  running  to  Jersey  for  charters,  and  they  were  already 
getting  all  that  they  asked  for.  Then  Mr.  Dill  displayed 
Point  Two  of  his  scheme;  and  for  those  States  whose 
statesmen  have  asked  me  covetously  how  Jersey  "  got  such 
a  lead  in  this  corporation  business,"  let  me  say  that  this  is 
the  feature  of  the  Jeresy  policy  to  adopt,  if  they  want  to 
out-Jersey  Jersey  in  the  betrayal  of  the  rest  of  us  to  the 
trusts. 

Mr.  Dill  explained  to  Governor  Abbett  that,  while  his 
State  had  liberal  laws,  other  States,  like  Delaware  and 
West  Virginia,  were  liberalizing  their  laws,  and  that  while 
the  advantages  of  Jersey  were  known  to  the  great  captains 
of  industry,  the  little  captains  did  not  know  about  them. 
Tobacco  was  there,  and  Standard  Oil,  the  Chicago  Stock 
Yards  and  Cordage,  and  Thurber-Whyland,  and  American 
Gas  and  Sugar;  but  where  were  the  little  fellows?  What 
was  wanted  was  a  State  that  would  not  only  open  up  its 
laws,  but  would  advertise  itself;  that  State  would  get  the 
business  which  would  go  forth  with  business  push,  adver- 
tising and  drumming  up  trade  among  the  businesses  that 
never  had  heard  of  West  Virginia,  Delaware,  and  New 
Jersey  as  dealers  in  lawful  license.  Now  a  State,  as  a 
State,  could  not  afford,  even  if  its  officials,  like  the  Secre- 
tary of  State  of  West  Virginia,  had  the  loyal  energy  to 
take  up  the  work,  to  go  out  on  the  road  showing  its  goods 
and  advertising  itself  as  the  easiest,  safest,  and  best  shop 
for  limited-liability  charters.  The  thing  to  do,  therefore, 
was  to  make  it  worth  while  for  a  private  company,  incor- 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      261 

porated  under  Jersey  laws,  to  undertake  this  part  of  the 
business.  So  Mr.  Dill  proposed  to  form  a  company  which, 
for  small  but  numerous  fees,  should  advertise  Jersey  as  a 
charter-granting  State,  explain  her  laws,  vouch  for  her 
courts,  attend  to  the  incorporation  of  commercial  compan- 
ies, and  look  out  for  them  at  home  while  they  were  off 
doing  business  in  the  other  States. 

The  Governor  of  New  Jersey  was  convinced,  but  while 
he  was  boss  of  the  State  and  the  actual  head  of  the  system, 
he  was  not  "  the  whole  thing."  He  told  Mr.  Dill  that  he 
must  see  the  Secretary  of  State,  Henry  C.  Kelsey,  who  was 
one  of  the  old  Democratic  State  House  Ring;  nothing 
could  be  done  without  that  interest.  Then  he  must  see 
Allan  L.  McDermott,  the  Abbett  lieutenant,  who  was  clerk 
of  the  Court  of  Chancery  and  chairman  of  the  Democratic 
State  Committee.  McDermott  handled  the  Legislature, 
and  nothing  could  be  done  without  legislation,  of  course. 
Then  he  must  see  some  Republican  of  influence,  say,  well, 
say  United  States  District  Attorney  Henry  S.  White; 
for  nothing  could  be  done  quietly  without  the  minority 
interest.  And  last,  but  not  least,  Mr.  Dill  must  see  some 
representative  of  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad;  the  road, 
though  not  in  control,  held  South  Jersey  and  owned  leg- 
islators. "  You  can't  do  without  the  Pennsylvania."  So 
Charles  B.  Thurston,  secretary,  in  Jersey  City,  of  Alex- 
ander Hamilton's  old  Associates  of  the  Jersey  Company, 
which  the  Pennsylvania  controlled,  with  all  the  shore  front 
and  exclusive  ferry  privileges,  was  added  to  Mr.  Dill's 
visiting  list. 

The  scheme  provided  for  all  these  men  and  their  inter- 


262     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

ests.  To  Mr.  Kelsey  was  shown  how  the  Secretary  of 
State's  office  would  get  fees,  fixed,  regular,  and  small,  but 
many  and,  in  the  aggregate,  large.  Also  Mr.  Kelsey  was 
to  come  into  the  company.  To  Mr.  McDermott  was  shown 
how  the  clerk  of  the  Court  of  Chancery  could  double  his 
fees  and,  besides,  Mr.  McDermott  was  to  have  an  interest 
in  the  company.  So,  also,  with  Mr.  White.  To  Mr.  Thurs- 
ton  it  was  shown  that  the  business,  by  increasing  the  in- 
come of  the  State  and  of  her  officials,  would  benefit  the 
Pennsylvania  and  all  other  railroads.  In  the  first  place, 
the  legitimate  expenses  of  the  State  were  growing.  When 
they  became  a  burden  to  the  taxpayer  again  there  would 
be  another  howl  to  tax  the  railroads.  The  railroads  had  just 
had  an  experience  of  that.  It  probably  would  not  be  the 
last.  In  the  second  place,  the  politicians  would  be  asking 
for  more  and  more  money  for  political  expenses,  and, 
unless  the  State  provided  graft,  the  roads  would  have  to 
meet  that  demand.  The  roads  were  there ;  they  couldn't 
get  away.  They  would  have  to  go  down  into  their  own 
pocket,  unless  they  could  go  down  into  somebody  else's 
pocket.  Mr.  Dill's  scheme  provided  somebody  else's  pocket ; 
it  would  bring  all  the  corporations  of  the  United  States 
into  Jersey  to  pay  her  expenses,  legitimate  and  political, 
and  save  the  railroads  from  that  horrid  cry,  "  equal  taxa- 
tion." This  line  of  reasoning  won  the  Pennsylvania,  and 
as  for  Mr.  Thurston,  who  presented  it  to  his  people  in 
Philadelphia,  Mr.  Thurston  himself  was  to  be  taken  into 
the  company. 

Thus  was  formed  the  Corporation  Trust  Company  of 
New  Jersey,  which  in  its  circulars  announced  that  "  we 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      263 

have  a  Board  of  Directors  which  includes  Henry  C.  Kel- 
sey,  Secretary  of  State;  Charles  B.  Thurston,  of  the 
Pennsylvania  Railroad;  Allan  L.  McDermott,"  etc.,  etc. 
Governor  Abbett  took  stock  in  the  company,  but,  as  some- 
one remarked,  pointedly,  "  Abbett  paid  for  his  stock,  which 
is  more  than  can  be  said  of  some  of  the  others  " ;  and  his 
name  was  not  used.  The  official,  inside  character  of  the 
company  was  sufficiently  indicated  by  the  other  names, 
and  hints  like  this :  "  Any  forms  issued  by  the  Secretary 
of  State  can  be  obtained  from  us  without  charge  " ;  or 
this:  "Our  location  (sic)  which  places  us  in  close  touch 
with  the  State  Department,  having  charge  .  .  .  will 
be  of  special  benefit  to  those  for  whom  we  may  act." 

Lest  we  be  unfair,  let  us  proceed  now  very  deliberately. 
This  was  a  graft.  This  company  was  organized  to  graft 
upon  the  incorporating  function  of  the  State,  and  the 
State  officials  were  in  on  it.  But  Jersey  is  a  business  man's 
State ;  business  men  and  their  lawyers  have  ruled  it  always, 
and  the  laws  they  have  made  permit  a  business  man  to  hold 
office  and  engage  in  private  business,  almost  any  office  and 
almost  any  business.  An  Attorney  General  may  take  a 
retainer  from  a  railroad;  while  I  was  writing  these  lines 
the  present  Attorney  General,  R.  M.  McCarter,  was  ap- 
pearing in  court  for  the  Lackawanna  Railroad;  and  so 
with  prosecutors  of  the  pleas  (District  Attorneys)  ;  they 
frequently  are  of  counsel  for  the  public  service  corporations 
against  whom  they  have  to  appear.  In  other  States,  as  in 
New  York  and  Pennsylvania,  for  example,  officials  in  the 
public  contracting  business  let  their  friends  or  their  wives 
appear  in  their  private  businesses.  In  Jersey,  the  Secre- 


264     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

tary  of  State  could  be,  as  he  was,  an  officer  of  the  Cor- 
poration Trust  Company  of  New  Jersey. 

Moreover,  this  company,  unlike  political-business  com- 
panies in  other  States,  and  even  in  New  Jersey,  was 
organized  not  to  rob,  but  to  help  the  State ;  it  was  to  make 
its  profits  by  increasing  the  profits  of  the  State.  As  things 
financial-political  go  in  America,  the  founders  of  the  Cor- 
poration Trust  Company  of  New  Jersey  were  engaging 
in  a  singularly  patriotic  business.  True,  their  prosperity 
was  to  be  achieved  at  the  expense  of  the  other  States,  and  it 
might  be  costly  to  the  United  States.  But  who  cares  about 
the  United  States?  That  is  too  big,  too  great,  too  grand 
and  glorious  to  need  care.  And,  as  for  the  other  States, 
Mr.  Dill  himself,  in  his  recent  address  at  Harvard,  said 
that  "  the  spirit  of  the  charter-granting  States  is  war, 
interstate  war." 

Again,  we  must  not  charge  up  to  this  company  all  the 
peculiarities  of  Jersey  corporation  laws.  That  would  be 
not  only  unjust,  but  ridiculous.  The  story  of  those  laws 
was  told  me  by  leaders  of  the  Jersey  bar  without  any 
mention  of  Dill  or  his  company.  The  Jersey  policy  was  a 
natural  growth  out  of  the  character  of  the  government 
and  people  of  the  State,  as  influenced  by  her  neighbors, 
New  York  and  Philadelphia.  From  the  beginning  of  the 
last  century,  when  Alexander  Hamilton  went  over  there 
and  drew  his  two  famous  charters,  for  the  Associates  of 
the  Jersey  Company,  already  mentioned,  and  for  the 
Society  for  the  Encouragement  of  Useful  Manufactures 
which  preempted  the  water  power  of  the  Passaic  River 
where  it  falls  near  what  is  now  the  city  of  Paterson — from 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      265 

that  time  on  Jersey  had  been  a  resort  for  corporation 
schemes.  She  was  a  business  man's  government  by  business 
men,  with  lawyers  and  politicians  for  tools  or  agents,  and 
the  traffic  in  her  special  charters  went  on  till  in  1875  amend- 
ments to  the  constitution  forbade  special  legislation.  After 
that,  when  you  wanted  a  special  law  you  procured  the 
passage  of  a  general  law,  but  the  foreign  railroads  and 
the  jealous  Jersey  men  were  so  rapacious  that  in  a  few 
years  the  Jersey  Legislature  had  enacted  for  special  pur- 
poses enough  general  corporation  laws  to  permit  almost 
anything — in  the  way  of  business.  Jersey  lawyers  go  fre- 
quently to  New  York,  and  in  the  'Eighties,  when  the  anti- 
monopoly  agitation  arose,  New  York  lawyers  and  national 
captains  of  industry,  worried  by  the  law  elsewhere,  heard 
of  Jersey  and  went  there  in  such  great  numbers  that,  by 
1891,  a  New  York  newspaper  complained  that  "  in  the 
last  two  years  1,626  (national)  corporations  with  an 
aggregate  capital  of  over  $600,000,000  have  been  organ- 
ized under  the  New  Jersey  laws." 

So,  when,  in  1890,  Governor  Abbett  and  Messrs.  Dill, 
Thurston,  McDermott,  and  their  friends  sat  down  together 
in  New  York  City  to  perfect  the  Dill  scheme,  they  were 
turning  a  wild  growth  into  a  cultivated  plant;  what  had 
been  a  natural,  subconscious  functioning  of  the  State, 
they  raised  up  into  an  intelligent,  orderly,  definite  policy. 
The  business  was  coming  of  itself  to  Jersey ;  all  that  was 
necessary  was  to  nurse  it  along  and  get  possession  of  it 
for  the  State  officials  in  the  Corporation  Trust  Company 
of  New  Jersey.  This  last  proved  no  easy  task.  At  that 
time  the  national  corporations  with  Jersey  charters  were 


266     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

what  a  New  York  judge  called  "tramps";  they  had  no 
domicile,  no  address  in  the  State  whence  they  were 
launched.  They  had  to  hold  certain  meetings  in  Jersey, 
however,  so  they  used  to  sail  now  and  then  by  ferry  to 
Jersey  City,  or  Hoboken,  where  they  took  rooms  for  an 
hour  or  two  in  some  hotel.  Taylor's  Hotel,  Jersey  City,  got 
most  of  this  business.  The  Corporation  Trust  Company 
opened  offices  nearby.  But  (so  conservative  is  capital) 
Sugar,  Tobacco,  and  the  others  were  slow  to  cross  the 
street.  Some  of  these  "  hotels  "  were  vice  resorts  at  night, 
but  the  trusts  didn't  care;  they  continued  to  use  them 
for  financial  assignations  by  day.  "  We  offered  them 
a  fine  *  financial  Raines  law  hotel,'  "  said  one  of  my  in- 
formants, "  with  bona  fide,  lawful  sandwiches,  but  they 
stuck  to  their  side-doors  and  the  stock,  wooden  '  meals.' ' 
It  was  not  till  the  Corporation  Trust  Company  passed 
laws  requiring  corporations  to  have  "  an  office,"  kept  open 
the  year  round,  with  books  and  an  agent,  and  to  hang  out 
a  sign,  that  the  corporations  were  driven  out  of  the  hotels. 
And  then  the  Corporation  Trust  Company  and  its  branches 
did  not  get  all  the  business.  The  men  interested  were  so 
careful  lest  they  frighten  the  corporations  away,  that, 
to-day,  under  the  law,  almost  anything  is  "  an  office," 
and  almost  every  bank,  trust  company,  and  lawyer  in  the 
State  displays  a  tablet  with  the  names  on  it  of  some  cor- 
porations doing  business  out  of  the  State.  Most  of  this 
trade  hangs  around  the  ferries,  however,  and  in  Jersey 
City  there  is  such  a  clustering  of  New  York  business  at 
the  Exchange  Place  landing  that  this  place  is  called  West 
Wall  Street,  and  the  Corporation  Trust  Company,  which 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      267 

has  now  two  or  three  rooms  in  a  high  building  on  the  site 
of  Taylor's  Hotel,  displays  the  "  signs  "  of  some  1,500 
companies — 1,500  of  the  biggest  corporations  in  the  world, 
whose  "  principal  office  "  is  here. 

Before  legislating  for  themselves,  however,  the  Corpo- 
ration Trust  group  legislated  for  the  State  and  for  the 
corporations ;  and  the  propaganda  began  at  the  same  time, 
and  very  interestingly.  Though  the  first  bills  were  in  the 
direction  of  sound  business,  they  were  passed  secretly.  The 
corporation  tax  had  been  fixed  by  Governor  Abbett  in  his 
first  term,  and  it  was  low  and  regular — one-tenth  of  one 
per  cent,  on  the  capital  stock.  Little  had  to  be  done  to, 
ensure  an  orderly,  simple  method  of  incorporation  without 
any  possibility  of  blackmail,  but  that  little  was  done. 
Fees  were  stated ;  to  be  sure  they  were  properly  distributed 
among  the  inside  officials,  but  the  system  was  to  be  above 
board. 

Thus  Dill's  idea  of  giving  Jersey  an  honest  advantage 
over  New  York  and  other  grafting  States  was  carried 
out,  secretly.  Why  secretly?  Other  bills  put  through 
were  in  the  interest  of  corporations,  but  even  these 
were  for  all  corporations;  they  were  not  for  some  one 
or  two  special  clients.  They  were  for  Jersey,  to  further 
the  policy  that  was  to  enrich  her.  Yet,  I  was  told :  "  The 
legislators  did  not  know  what  the  bills  were  for.  All  they 
knew  was  that  each  crowd  got  orders  from  its  own  boss, 
and,  though  some  of  the  shrewd  fellows  remarked  that  all 
parties  were  for  these  measures,  it  was  assumed  that  this 
was  some  private  graft  of  the  leaders ;  so  they  voted  like 
blind  pigs."  Thus,  then,  the  great  Jersey  policy  was  in- 


268     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

itiated,  as  a  policy,  by  the  corrupt  Jersey  Legislature,  in 
cynical  ignorance! 

"  But  why  were  you  so  quiet  about  it  ?  "  I  asked.  "  You 
wanted  advertisement,  and  here  was  something  done  for 
Jersey ;  why  not  let  Jerseymen  know  ?  " 

"  We  didn't  want  Jersey  to  know  till  we  had  had  time 
to  prove  that  the  policy  was  paying  the  State.  Then, 
when  the  people  felt  the  effect  in  their  taxes,  we  knew  there 
would  be  no  kick  from  Jersey." 

The  other  States  "  kicked,"  however,  and  promptly.  I 
have  quoted  from  a  New  York  newspaper  of  1891.  Other 
papers  took  up  th.e  discussion,  and  before  long  Jersey's 
liberality  to  the  corporations  and  her  rush  of  business  in 
charters  was  the  talk  from  Maine  to  California.  I  remem- 
ber writing  myself  some  newspaper  articles  on  the  sub- 
ject, and  you,  who  read  these  lines,  you  may  have  taken 
your  part  in  the  discussion,  too.  But  here  is  something 
neither  of  us  knew  at  the  time :  that  discussion  was  inspired 
in  the  interest  of  Jersey.  The  man  who  "  fed  the  first  facts  " 
to  the  New  York  papers  told  me  it  was  then  and  thus  that 
the  advertisement  of  Jersey's  wideopenness  to  business  was 
begun.  Our  anti-Jersey  anti-trust  facts,  our  figures,  and 
some  of  our  thoughts  were  passed  out  to  us  by  men  who 
wanted  corporations  to  come  to  Jersey  for  their  charters. 
The  System  is  a  wonderful  thing ;  it  votes  us,  it  buys  and 
it  sells  us,  and — it  does  a  lot  of  our  thinking  for  us.  It 
turns  our  abuse  to  its  uses.  Our  denunciation  of  a  boss 
helps  to  make  him  a  boss,  by  telling  bribers  where  to  go 
to  buy  favors.  As  we  shall  see,  the  Jersey  drummers  for 
Jersey's  trust  business  have  used  in  their  propaganda 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      269 

every  offensive  act  of  hers,  but,  in  the  beginning,  our  anti- 
trust passions  were  aroused  against  Jersey  for  the  purpose 
of  starting  her  on  the  road  to  become — what  she  is. 

Well,  and  what  is  she?  I  have  called  her  a  traitor;  let's 
see  if  that  is  too  strong  a  term.  Dr.  Ernst  von  Halle,  the 
German  economist,  says :  "  By  the  end  of  1894  the 
Federal  Government,  twenty-two  States,  and  one  Terri- 
tory, had  enacted  anti-trust  laws."  He  gives  a  review  of 
this  legislation,  State  by  State,  from  1887  to  1894,  con- 
cluding with  the  observation  that  "  the  United  States  Act 
was  passed  in  1891."  We  need  not  go  into  details.  This 
is  the  point:  we,  the  people  of  the  United  States,  were 
anti-trust.  We  may  have  been  foolish,  we  may  have  been 
wrong;  but  in  the  period  from  1887  to  1894  our  thinkers 
were  proposing,  our  legislators  were  legislating,  and  our 
courts  were  deciding  to  check  the  growth  of  great  combi- 
nations of  capital  which  threatened  competition  in  trade. 

That  was  the  time  when  New  Jersey  said  to  the  trusts : 
"  Come  to  us.  We'll  let  you  do  anything.  You  needn't  stay 
here.  Pay  us  for  them,  and  we'll  give  you  letters  of  marque 
to  sail  out  into  the  other  States  and  do  business  as  you 
please.  The  other  States  have  made  your  business  a  crime ; 
we'll  license  you  to  break  their  laws.  We'll  sell  out  the  whole 
United  States  to  you,  and  cheap;  and  our  courts  are 
*  safe '  and  our  Legislature  is  '  liberal,'  and  our  location 
is  convenient." 

Do  you  think  this  is  putting  it  too  baldly?  Listen,  then, 
to  a  Jerseyman,  who,  from  the  politician's  standpoint,  is 
thoroughly  versed  in  the  Jersey  policy  from  its  formal 
inception.  I  asked  him  to  sum  up  for  me  the  spirit  of  that 


270     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

policy.  "  When  it  was  being  talked  over,"  I  said ;  "  when 
you  were  considering  how  corporate  legislation  would 
profit  you,  your  friends,  your  State,  just  what  was  your 
attitude  toward  the  other  States  and  the  United  States  ?  " 
"  To  hell  with  the  rest ;  what  does  Jersey  care  for  other 
States?  That  was  the  attitude.  Their  loss  was  our  gain. 
As  for  the  trusts,  we  let  them  play  in  everybody's  backyard 
— except  ours.  And,  so  far  as  possible,  we  fixed  it  so  they 
couldn't  be  kicked  out."  It  was  in  this  spirit  that,  in  1894, 
when  the  Great  White  Spirit  Company  wanted  to  run  a 
distillery  in  Massachusetts,  and  couldn't  do  it  as  a  Massa- 
chusetts company,  because  Massachusetts  law  forbade  the 
organization  of  domestic  companies  for  distilling  pur- 
poses, New  Jersey  provided  the  charter.  Massachusetts 
had  not  thought  to  provide  against  "  foreign  corpora- 
tions," so  New  Jersey  set  that  distillery  right  down  on 
the  banks  of  the  Charles  River,  and  there  it  stayed  until 
insolvency  closed  it. 

This  is  not  war.  Mr.  Dill's  word  is  too  large.  This  is 
business.  Massachusetts,  with  her  strict  law,  created  a 
demand  for  a  loose  law,  and  Jersey  supplied  the  demand, 
cleverly,  and  for  money.  Jersey  was  smart.  So  we  of  the 
United  States  with  our  anti-trust  laws  developed  a  market 
for  trust  laws,  and  Jersey  made  them  to  order.  That's 
business.  Jersey  sold  us  out,  and  that  is  treason.  But 
what's  the  difference?  There  was  money  in  it.  Let's  fol- 
low the  growth  of  a  few  features  of  her  law,  and  see  how 
she  did  it. 

The  great  companies  which  we  know  as  trusts  are  so 
called  because,  at  first,  they  were  combinations  of  allied 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      271 

businesses  whose  management  was  put  into  the  hands  of 
trustees  or  pools.  State  and  federal  laws  forbade  such 
trusts,  and  business  character  (or,  perhaps,  it  was  human 
nature),  was  against  them.  The  several  companies  broke 
faith;  they  gave  rates  or  cut  prices,  so  that  between  the 
law  and  the  mutual  distrust  of  trustees,  pooling-trusts 
broke  up.  Thus,  for  example,  the  Standard  Oil  Company 
was  dissolved  by  law,  and  all  railroad  pools  of  those  days 
were  short-lived.  What  was  needed,  therefore,  to  beat  the 
law  and  human  nature  was  a  perfect,  lawful  combination. 
So  the  corporation  lawyers  who  were  steering  Jersey  legis- 
lation devised  the  "  holding  company,"  with  power  to  own 
absolutely  all  its  subsidiary  companies.  Starting  from  a 
decision  of  the  Jersey  court  in  1888,  that  a  corporation 
had  no  implied  power  to  purchase  and  hold  the  shares  of 
another,  an  act  was  passed  in  the  next  year  authorizing 
directors  to  purchase  the  stock  of  any  company  "  manu- 
facturing and  producing  materials  necessary  to  its  busi- 
ness." This  was  not  enough,  and  in  the  course  of  the  next 
few  years  the  clause  was  made  to  read,  "  manufacturing 
and  producing  materials  and  property  necessary,"  etc.  In 
1893  this  was  simplified  to  let  directors  "  buy  stocks  of 
any  other  company  which  the  directors  might  deem  neces- 
sary." And  in  1896,  when  the  corporation  laws  were  re- 
vised and  codified  under  a  Republican  administration,  this 
section  was  broadened  like  this :  "  Any  corporation  may 
purchase,  hold,  sell,  assign,  transfer,  mortgage,  pledge, 
or  otherwise  dispose  of  the  shares  ...  or  any  bonds, 
securities,  or  evidences  of  indebtedness  created  by  any 
other  corporation  or  corporations  of  this  or  any  other 


272     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

State,  and  while  owner  of  such  stock,  may  exercise  all 
the  rights,  powers,  and  privileges  of  ownership,  including 
the  right  to  vote  thereon."  There  we  have  the  holding 
company,  which  makes  the  trust  lawful  and  strong. 

Again,  the  life  of  charters  and  the  purposes  of  corpora- 
tions were  limited.  The  Jersey  law  specified  the  things  for 
which  a  company  might  be  incorporated,  and  after  1891 
the  list  grew  year  by  year  till,  in  1896,  charters  were 
made  perpetual,  and  instead  of  a  list  of  permissions,  the 
Revision  Act  said  any  "  three  or  more  persons  may  become 
a  corporation  for  any  lawful  purpose  or  purposes  what- 
ever," and  then  followed  a  list  of  exceptions.  And  this 
list  of  exceptions  was  drawn  only  to  protect  from  the 
trusts  Jersey  and  Jersey  interests — banks,  insurance,  rail- 
road, telegraph,  and  telephone  companies.  As  Frank  P. 
McDermott  says  in  his  "  Pointers  on  New  Jersey  Corpora- 
tions," "  Companies  for  constructing  and  maintaining 
railroad,  telegraph,  and  telephone  lines  outside  the  State 
are  not  within  the  exceptions." 

These  and  many  other  such  laws  were  all  in  the  direction 
of  permitting  trusts  to  exist  and  to  stop  competition ;  i.  e., 
to  become  monopolies.  But  the  captains  of  industry  had 
other  needs.  They  wanted  not  only  to  do  business;  they 
wanted  also  to  exploit  and  finance  it,  and  make  money  out 
of  the  operation.  Jersey  was  willing.  The  next  string  of 
legislation  was  to  enable  promoters  to  buy  up  competing 
companies  without  paying  money  for  them.  They  were  per- 
mitted to  pay  with  shares  in  the  trust.  In  1891  an  act 
was  passed  permitting  directors  to  issue  additional  stock, 
and  another  authorizing  them  to  "  buy  property  and  pay 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE     273 

stock  therefor."  In  1893,  stock  issued  for  property — that 
is  to  say,  paid  out  to  the  owners  of  the  purchased  company 
— might  be  exempted  from  calls  for  cash,  but  it  had  to  be 
marked.  Later  this  last  requirement  which  embarrassed 
promoters  who  paid  themselves  in  stock,  was  abolished. 
In  the  famous  revision  of  1896,  all  powers  necessary  to 
water  and  pour  forth  stock  were  rounded  up  in  the  famous 
dummy-director  clause,  which  declared  that  "  the  judg- 
ment of  directors  as  to  the  value  of  property  purchased 
shall  be  conclusive."  The  meaning  of  this  law  may  be 
brought  out  in  a  story  Edwin  Lefevre  tells.  When  one  of 
the  great  steel  combinations  was  forming,  a  group  of 
financiers,  who  had  been  buying  companies  in  one  city,  got 
drunk  on  the  train  that  was  taking  them  home.  They 
talked  steel,  and  somebody  suggested  buying  out  a  certain 
mill  at  a  town  on  the  way.  They  left  the  train.  It  was  late, 
but  they  went  to  the  mill-man's  house  in  a  hack  and  called 
him  to  the  window.  He  protested  in  his  night  shirt  that  he 
did  not  want  to  sell. 

"  How  much  is  your  plant  worth  ?  "  they  demanded. 

"  Two  hundred  .thousand,"  he  said,  "  but  it  is  not  for 
sale." 

"  We'll  give  four  hundred  thousand." 

"  Not  for  sale." 

"  Five  hundred,"  said  the  drunken  financiers.  "  Six." 

To  make  a  long  story  short,  the  man  finally  came  down 
to  the  door,  went  with  them  to  a  club,  and  sold  his  mill  for 
several  times  what  it  was  worth.  The  financiers  sold  it  to 
their  trust  for  twice  what  it  cost  them  in  watered  stock, 
and  then  they  sold  their  trust  out  to  the  United  States 


STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

Steel  Company  at  so  high  a  price  that  even  Morgan 
quailed.  But  Morgan  took  it,  and,  as  we  all  know,  he  sold 
it  to  us.  All  this  was  possible  under  the  Jersey  law  per- 
mitting trust  directors  to  put  their  own  value  on  purchased 
companies. 

One  more  of  McDermott's  "  pointers  on  Jersey  corpora- 
tions," and  we  may  proceed  with  our  story.  Our  captains 
of  industry  wanted  not  only  to  form  trusts  without  the 
law  and  to  finance  them  without  money;  they  wanted  to 
control  them  without  owning  the  majority  stock.  Jersey 
let  them.  In  1891  she  passed  a  law  permitting  stockhold- 
ers to  vote  by  proxy ;  the  leaders  thus  could  corner  the 
votes.  Another  law  allowed  stockholders  to  define  a  quo- 
rum. Another  gave  directors  power  to  decide  the  amount 
of  dividends.  And  finally,  in  the  '96  Revision,  stock- 
holders could  be  classified,  preferred  and  common,  and 
unequal  power  given  to  them.  Under  this  law  you  and 
I  could  organize  a  company  with  property  worth,  say, 
a  million.  We  could  issue  bonds  for  that  amount;  bonds 
have  no  vote.  If  we  then  put  out  one  million  of  preferred 
stock  with  no  vote,  and  a  million  of  common  stock  with 
no  value  but  a  vote,  we  could  sell  all  the  stock  that  the 
market  would  take  and  yet  control  the  property.  In  other 
words,  we  could  eat  our  cake  and  have  it,  too — which  is 
one  secret  of  high  finance. 

The  famous  revision  of  1896,  referred  to  above  as  the 
culmination  of  each  line  of  trust  legislation,  was  a  Re- 
publican act.  The  Democrats,  the  so-called  anti-trust 
Democratic  party,  initiated  the  great  Jersey  policy  which 
gave  us  the  trusts.  But  that  party  gave  Jersey  bad  gov- 


NEW   JERSEY:   A   TRAITOR    STATE     275 

ernment ;  the  government  that  sold  us  out,  sold  out  Jersey 
as  well.  Governor  Abbett,  who,  to  attain  a  seat  in  the 
United  States  Senate,  let  his  party  represent  trusts,  rail- 
roads, saloons,  race-tracks,  and  local  public  service 
"  crowds,"  disappointed  the  rapacity  of  these  interests. 
Ambitious  as  he  was,  and  unscrupulous,  this  "  demagogue  " 
was  afraid  of  public  opinion,  so  when  his  term  expired  they 
beat  him,  and  gave  the  seat  for  which  he  had  sacrificed 
so  much,  to  his  lieutenant,  James  Smith,  Jr.,  the  boss  of 
Essex  County,  and  the  largest  contributor,  in  the  new 
public  service  crowd,  to  the  Democratic  campaign  fund. 
A!  representative  of  corrupt  special  interests  at  home, 
Smith  was  one  of  the  four  "  Democratic  "  Senators  who 
helped  the  Republicans  hold  up  President  Cleveland's 
tariff  reform  bill  till  Aldrich  got  the  sugar  schedule  fixed. 
Thus  Smith  became  the  boss  of  the  Jersey  Democracy, 
and  with  Abbett  out,  Abbett's  system  went  wild.  With 
a  weak  man  for  Governor  and  a  race-track  starter  in 
the  Speakership  (called  the  startership)  the  race-tracks 
and  the  liquor  men,  the  trolleys  and  the  railroads,  got 
all  that  they  wanted.  Legislation  was  for  sale.  Cities 
and  towns  were  thrown  open  to  loot;  public  property, 
from  franchises  down  to  cheap  furniture,  was  stolen, 
and  vice  and  crime  reigned.  This  was  the  era  of  "  bad  " 
government  to  which  Jerseymen  look  back  with  horror. 
As  they  speak  of  those  days,  you  would  think  that 
only  the  race-tracks,  saloons,  and  vicious  politicians  were 
busy.  Jerseymen  forget  that  it  was  then  that  the  big 
trusts  and  the  public  service  corporations  put  through 
some  of  their  worst  legislation.  The  stench  of  the  vice 


276     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

graft  did  not  repel,  it  attracted  big  business,  and  such 
national  concerns  as  the  Standard  Oil  rushed  over  there, 
and  as  for  the  Jersey  public  service  people,  it  was  in  1893 
that  they  put  through  as  separate,  unnoticed  bills  a  lot 
of  legislation  which  together  not  only  allowed  them  to 
merge,  consolidate,  and  finance,  but  to  compel  unwilling 
combinations  by  threats  of  parallel  lines;  and  not  only 
to  take  streets,  but  to  grab  turnpikes  without  county 
consent.  Jersey  was  made  a  Tenderloin  of  vicious  finance 
at  the  time  she  was  a  Tenderloin  of  political  graft. 

But  a  change  occurred.  Jersey  rose  in  revolt.  The  clergy 
preached;  they  threw  open  the  pulpits  to  lawyers  and 
merchants,  and  these  laymen  preached  to  churches  filled 
with  men  who  went  forth  and — voted.  The  Democratic 
party  was  thrown  out  of  the  Legislature  in  1894  and  1895, 
and  in  1896  John  W.  Griggs,  the  first  Republican  Gov- 
ernor Jersey  had  had  in  some  thirty  years,  was  elected  to 
make  the  administration  also  Republican.  Thus  ended  the 
Democratic  government  which  gave  to  Jersey  bad  gov- 
ernment, and  to  the  United  States — the  trusts. 

What  did  the  Republicans  give  us?  That  was  the  re- 
form party  in  New  Jersey ;  what  reforms  did  it  bring 
about  ?  The  race-tracks  were  abolished ;  the  liquor  interest 
was — quieted;  all  criminal  vice  and  crime  were  driven  to 
cover.  The  most  flagrant  of  the  trolley  laws  were  repealed. 
But  the  trolleys  went  on.  They  had  the  roads  and  streets ; 
they  got  extensions,  but  noiselessly.  They  had  their  per- 
petual franchises  and  their  consolidations.  They  got  more, 
and  they  combined  their  consolidations.  And,  as  for  the 
corporation  laws,  which  concerned  you  and  me,  they  were 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE     277 

not  repealed.  They  were  "  improved."  The  Revision  Com- 
mission of  1896  was  appointed  by  Governor  Griggs,  and 
it  codified,  amplified — it  perfected  in  competent,  Republi- 
can fashion  the  charter-granting  business  policy  of  Gov- 
ernor Abbett,  the  Democrat.  And  this  was  done  with  not 
only  the  whole  country,  but  with  New  Jersey  also  looking 
on.  The  policy  had  begun  to  pay.  In  1890  Jersey  had 
collected  only  some  $292,000  from  her  miscellaneous  cor- 
porations; under  the  stimulus  of  the  corporation-trust 
legislation  and  propaganda  she  gathered  in  $405,000; 
and  by  1896  her  revenue  from  this  source  was  $707,000. 
This  was  good ;  good  business  and  "  good  "  government. 

Good  government  began  in  New  Jersey  in  1896 — what 
Jerseymen  call  "  good,"  and  what  most  of  us  would  call 
"  good  "  if  we  lived  in  New  Jersey.  General  Sewell,  the 
veteran  Republican  boss,  took  charge.  He  was  sent  back 
to  the  United  States  Senate  to  represent  us.  Really  he 
represented  the  Pennsylvania  Railroad,  but  he  was  a  broad, 
conservative  business  man,  and  he  took  care  of  all  business 
interests.  He  rallied  about  him  all  railroads,  all  pro- 
tected industries,  all  the  public  service  groups,  Dem- 
ocratic and  Republican  alike,  and  he  was  on  friendly  terms 
with  the  leaders  of  both  political  parties.  To  be  sure 
there  was  corruption,  but  it  was  "  good "  corruption ; 
quiet,  orderly,  in  the  interest  of  business.  The  clergy  were 
not  scandalized  by  it  and  the  people  heard  nothing  but 
rumors  which  no  one  could  prove.  The  people  were  not 
represented,  but  the  good  people  do  not  really  want  repre- 
sentative government ;  "  good  government  "  is  their  cry, 
and  the  Jerseymen  who  had  that  did  not  "  kick." 


278     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

There  was  still  some  kicking  in  the  United  States.  Busi- 
ness was  reviving,  and  the  Jersey  trusts  began  to  flourish. 
These  caused  complaints,  but  most  of  us  took  the  advice 
of  the  late  Governor  Flower,  who  said :  "  Don't  kick  at 
the  trusts ;  get  into  them."  One  loud  political  protest  was 
raised  in  Governor  Flower's  State:  The  Albany  Legisla- 
ture appointed  a  committee  to  investigate  all  Jersey  trusts 
that  were  operating  in  New  York,  and  that  committee 
came  down  to  New  York  City  after  the  Sugar  Trust.  But 
the  Sugar  Trust  put  its  books  on  a  boat  and  rushed  them 
over  to  Jersey,  and  Jersey,  under  the  guidance  of  her 
New  York  corporation  lawyers,  drew  up  and  rushed 
through  the  Trenton  Legislature  a  bill  to  protect  her 
own.  This  so-called  protective  act  is  a  remarkable  meas- 
ure. It  says :  "  No  action  or  proceeding  shall  be  main- 
tained in  any  court  of  this  State  against  any  stockholder, 
officer,  or  director  of  any  domestic  (Jersey)  corporation 
for  the  purpose  of  enforcing  any  statutory  personal  lia- 
bility .  .  .  whether  .  .  .  penal  or  contractural,  if 
.  .  .  created  .  .  .  by  the  statutes  or  laws  of  any 
other  State" 

Here  was  a  defiance  to  the  other  States.  Put  through  in 
eighteen  hours,  with  the  whole  country  watching  the 
"  fight  for  the  Sugar  Trust's  books,"  Jersey  was  not 
ashamed  to  be  seen  saving  one  trust  from  possibly  just 
punishment  for  breaking  a  New  York  law;  on  the  con- 
trary, she  took  the  occasion  to  announce  to  all  trusts  that 
she  would  save  them  all  from  all  laws  "  penal  or  con- 
tractural," of  all  "  other  States."  Her  drummers,  the 
corporation  trust  companies  (at  least  two  of  them),  sent 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE     279 

out  to  their  clients,  the  trusts,  an  identical  circular  boast- 
ing of  the  act,  as  follows : 

"  May  we  not  refer  to  this  as  an  instance  of  the  watch- 
ful care  which  the  New  Jersey  Corporation  Guarantee  and 
Trust  Co.  (ditto  the  Corporation  Trust  Co.  of  N.  J.) 
exercises  over  the  corporations  located  with  it  when  we 
say  that  this  act,  the  importance  of  which  cannot  be  over- 
estimated, was  drawn  by  our  counsel,  was  introduced  at 
8.30  P.M.  of  March  29,  and  by  2.30  P.M.  of  the  following 
day  was  signed  by  the  Governor  and  became  a  law?  " 

The  whole  spirit  of  this  "  good "  Jersey  government 
was  toward  the  indulgence  of  corporate  business,  and  every 
step  it  took  in  that  direction  was  advertised  not  only  by 
our  clamor,  but  by  circulars  sent  out  by  her  citizens  to 
attract  business  to  their  financial  Raines  law  hotels.  I  have 
a  lot  of  these  circulars  stating  the  "  advantages  of  corpo- 
rations organized  under  the  laws  of  New  Jersey."  They 
say :  "  You  are  not  called  upon  to  disclose  the  financial 
standing  of  your  business,  nor  to  make  public  the  details 
thereof."  "  We  (the  financial  hotel)  attend  to  every  detail, 
including,  if  you  desire,  the  organization  of  your  company, 
notify  you  of  all  meetings  which  you  are  required  to  hold 
and  see  that  they  are  legally  conducted."  Again :  "  It  is 
unnecessary  for  you  to  come  to  New  Jersey,  as  the  matter 
(organization  and  meetings)  can  be  completed  by  mail." 
Again :  "  We  have  employees  of  this  office  who  act  as  in- 
corporators,  who  would  sign  the  charter,  complete  the 
organization,  and  return  you  all  the  papers  ready  for  the 
company  to  do  business  within  three  days."  But  there  are 
some  exactions : — "  The  statute  requires  one  director  to 


280     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

be  a  resident  of  this  State ;  whom  we  will  furnish,  if  desired, 
without  extra  charge." 

No  matter  how  great  and  good  trusts  may  be,  there  is 
something  disgusting  about  this.  But  these  business  rulers 
of  this  "  safe  "  and  business-like  State  have  gone  lower 
than  that.  In  1898  they  made  Jersey  a  retreat  for  property 
that  would  escape  taxes.  Take  the  case  of  money.  New 
Jersey  does  not  (in  practice)  tax  deposits  in  banks  and 
trust  companies.  New  York  does,  and  she  requires  all 
foreign  corporations  to  make  sworn  statements  of  their 
balances.  So  the  ferry  landings  in  Jersey  are  choked  with 
trust  companies  and  banks  which  are  agents  of  New 
York  companies,  and  some  rich  men  have  little  depositories 
of  their  own.  If  you  are  rich  enough  to  be  a  tax  dodger, 
you  keep  an  account  in  a  Jersey  "  bank."  You  deposit  in 
New  York  in  favor  of  that  bank,  and  draw  your  checks 
on  it,  but  the  money  comes  from  the  New  York  bank. 
This  practice  is  advertised  openly  in  newspapers,  and 
Jersey's  "  Raines  law  banks  "  put  out  timely  hints  like 
this:  "The  Comptroller  of  New  York  has  fixed  the  31st 
day  of  October  as  the  day  upon  which  the  report  is  to 
be  made  to  him  for  the  purpose  of  fixing  the  tax.  .  .  . 
The  amount  of  your  bank-balance  and  the  property  you 
have  in  New  York  on  that  day  will  have  a  bearing  on  the 
amount  of  taxes  you  must  pay."  That  is  all;  but  before 
such  days  you  see  boys  going  to  Jersey  with  bags  of 
money  and  securities. 

Jersey  is  a  State  in  business.  The  business  men  who 
govern  her  have  turned  her  into  a  great  commercial  con- 
cern. Does  it  pay? 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE     281 

Her  main  line  has  paid  well  so  far.  The  miscellaneous 
corporations,  which  netted  her  $707,000  in  1896,  paid 
nearly  a  million  in  1899;  nearly  a  million  and  a  half  in 
1900,  more  than  a  million  and  a  half  in  1901 ;  in  1902, 
nearly  two  millions,  and  in  1903,  $2,177,297.81.  Her  debt 
was  wiped  out.  She  is  famous  for  her  schools.  She  has 
the  finest  roads  in  the  country ;  one-third  of  the  macadam 
roads  in  the  United  States  are  in  New  Jersey.  But  listen 
to  her  new  Governor,  Edward  C.  Stokes,  summing  up. 
He  is  a  Pennsylvania  Railroad  man,  so  he  includes  the 
railroad  tax  receipts  in  his  statement  of  the  case.  "  At 
the  close  of  the  last  fiscal  year  the  balance  in  the  treasury 
amounted  to  $2,940,918.98.  The  ordinary  receipts  for 
the  year  amounted  to  $4,302,370.61,  of  which  nearly 
seventy-eight  per  cent.,  or  $3,351,543.69,  came  from  rail- 
roads and  business  companies  domiciled  in  our  State.  Of 
the  entire  income  of  the  government,  not  a  penny  was 
contributed  directly  by  the  people.  .  .  .  The  State  is 
caring  for  the  blind,  the  feeble-minded,  and  the  insane, 
supporting  our  prisoners  and  reformatories,  educating 
the  younger  generations,  developing  a  magnificent  road 
system,  maintaining  the  State  government  and  courts  of 
justice,  all  of  which  would  be  a  burden  upon  the  tax- 
payer except  for  our  present  fiscal  policy.  To  have  raised 
last  year,  by  direct  taxation,  the  income  of  the  State, 
would  have  imposed  upon  property  a  tax  rate  of  nearly 
one-half  of  one  per  cent." 

There  is  no  doubt,  then,  about  these  profits.  But  good- 
will is  the  greatest  asset  of  a  Jersey  corporation.  Is  her 
own  good-will  all  right?  Can  she  hold  the  business ?  Jersey 


282     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

is  worrying  over  this  question  herself.  This  was  what 
Governor  Stokes  had  in  mind  when  he  wrote  the  passage 
quoted  above.  He  sees  other  States  getting  the  business 
away  from  Jersey.  "  The  incorporations  in  one  State  last 
year,"  he  says,  "show  a  capital  of  $111,255,500;  in 
another,  $251,971,620;  in  another,  $285,553,700;  in  New 
Jersey,  $313,569,620."  New  Jersey  still  leads,  but,  says 
the  Governor  of  New  Jersey,  "  our  State  is  by  no  means 
attracting  all  the  great  moneyed  interests  seeking  articles 
of  incorporation." 

What  is  the  matter?  Three  things  are  the  matter.  In 
the  first  place,  while  Jersey  was  helping  trusts  to  wipe  out 
competition,  she  could  not  create  a  monopoly  in  such  legis- 
lation. Any  American  State  can  go  into  that  business, 
and  some  have.  Jersey  is  suffering  from  competition. 
Her  example  in  betrayal  was  promptly  followed  by  States 
that  are  willing  to  give  lower  laws  at  a  lower  price,  and  if 
the  rivalry  in  lax  legislation  goes  on  at  the  present  rate, 
the  trusts  will  be  able  to  get  all  they  want,  and  Jersey  may 
have  to  suffer  with  the  rest  of  us. 

The  second  thing  the  matter  is  that  Jersey's  trusts 
have  abused  Jersey's  frailty  and  discredited  her  corpora- 
tion laws.  Those  trusts  which  she  launched  so  completely 
armed  with  indulgences  for  every  thinkable  financial  sin, 
have  come  sailing  back,  as  we  saw  Sugar  do,  for  further 
dispensations  and  more  power.  A  Jersey  charter  is  a  chip 
off  the  sovereignty  of  the  State;  it  is  what  a  constitution 
is  to  a  State.  Under  her  laws  you  could  draw  a  charter 
distributing  power  and  rights  at  will.  You  could  dis- 
franchise a  majority  of  the  stock  and  let  the  board  of 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      283 

directors  declare  dividends,  earned  or  unearned,  or  with- 
hold them.  In  Jersey,  you,  not  the  Legislature,  made  your 
corporation  laws,  and  Jersey's  drummers  warned  promoters 
as  follows :  "  You  can  draw  your  charter  as  broad  as  you 
please;  be  sure  to  use  foresight  and  care."  Even  after 
all  this  the  Jersey  trusts  committed  crimes  or  wanted  to, 
and  back  they  came  for  amendments  to  her  laws  to  cover 
them.  In  1901,  United  States  Steel  asked  that  the  law 
which  provided  for  a  two-thirds  vote  be  changed  to  two- 
thirds  of  the  stock  present.  In  1902  it  was  back  again 
for  a  special  act  to  permit  the  conversion  of  stock  into 
bonds  which  might  be  sold  below  par.  This  operation, 
Professor  William  Ripley,  in  his  "  Trusts,  Pools,  and 
Corporations  "  says,  "  betrayed  a  disregard  of  the  prin- 
ciples of  sound  finance  and  even  of  common  honesty  and 
fair  dealing  with  the  stockholders."  In  1903,  Malting, 
Amalgamated  Copper,  and  other  trusts  appeared  at 
Trenton  for  a  law  to  remove  the  liabilities  of  directors 
before  the  courts  for  crimes  already  committed.  This  was 
putting  the  State  regularly  into  the  business  of  selling, 
not  only  indulgences,  but  absolution. 

These  are  but  a  few  instances  of  what  has  developed 
into  a  large  part  of  Jersey's  business,  and,  taken  together 
with  such  scandals  as  the  Shipbuilding  Trust,  which  failed, 
and  the  Franklin  Syndicate  of  520-per-ccnt.-Miller  fame, 
which  ended  in  prison,  and  other  unfortunate  Jersey  com- 
panies, a  Jersey  charter  was  brought  to  mean  to  many 
men  nothing  but  danger.  No  wonder,  then,  that  James 
B.  Dill  now  advocates  federal  charters,  and  Governor 
Stokes,  to  save  the  business  of  his  State,  recommends  a 


284     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

revision  of  the  Jersey  laws  "  to  safeguard  the  public,"  and 
"  protect  the  stockholders  of  other  States." 

The  third  thing  the  matter  is,  perhaps,  the  saddest  of 
all.  The  betrayer  is  being  betrayed.  It  was  reported  in  Jer- 
sey while  I  was  there  that  her  junior  United  States  Senator, 
John  F.  Dryden,  president  of  the  Prudential  (Life)  In- 
surance Company  of  America,  was  in  favor  of  President 
Roosevelt's  recommendation  that  the  Federal  Government 
take  over  the  charter-granting  function  of  the  States. 
Two  States,  Wisconsin  and  Massachusetts,  have  objected 
to  the  Prudential's  methods,  so  Senator  Dryden,  being  a 
Jerseyman  and  selfish,  might  be  willing  to  sacrifice  the 
interest  of  Jersey  if  the  United  States  would  let  him 
operate  in  two  more  States  than  a  Jersey  charter  can  open 
to  him.  But  Dryden  since  has  introduced  a  bill  to  put 
insurance  companies  under  national  control,  and  that  may 
satisfy  him.  Her  Senator  still  may  represent  her.  But  her 
drummer  is  lost  to  her.  The  Corporation  Trust  Company, 
proving  a  good  thing,  was  bought  in  1902  by  some  New 
Yorkers  belonging  to  the  Equitable  Life  Insurance  crowd, 
and  those  men  have  broadened  the  field ;  they  do  business 
not  for  New  Jersey  alone,  but,  as  they  advertise,  in  all 
charter-granting  States.  Jersey's  own  original  partner  is 
in  business  with  her  rivals. 

Abused  by  her  progeny,  the  trusts;  betrayed  by  the 
agents  of  her  treason ;  outdone  in  self -prostitution  by 
sister  States,  younger  and  more  reckless  in  the  business, 
Jersey  is  finding  that  her  liberal  policy  was  too  liberal. 
Governor  Stokes  says :  "  The  day  of  gigantic  business 
combinations  is  on  the  wane,"  and  to  catch  the  smaller 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE     285 

companies,  he  is  urging  legislation  to  "  insure  the  faith- 
ful administration  of  the  affairs  "  of  business  companies, 
to  guard  the  "  rights  of  the  owner  of  a  single  share  of 
stock,"  and  "  to  remedy  abuses."  Coming  so  late,  this 
sounds  pathetic,  and  when  you  hear  that  Governor  Stokes 
thinks  that,  at  best,  the  business  is  good  for  only  a  few 
years  more,  you  will  see  that  there  is  something  desperate 
about  it. 

But  the  trusts  don't  care  what  becomes  of  Jersey.  They 
have  got  what  they  wanted  out  of  her,  and  can  go  else- 
where now.  Has  her  policy  paid  the  trusts?  Of  course, 
the'  promoters  have  profited  by  it,  but  has  business?  Busi- 
ness men  say  "  No."  While  I  was  working  on  Jersey  I 
had  to  spend  a  great  deal  of  time  in  Wall  Street,  and  I 
heard  this  question  discussed.  The  feeling  of  conservative 
corporation  men  can  best  be  indicated  by  the  proposition 
two  of  them  made  to  me ;  one  was  the  president  of  one  of 
the  oldest  and  cleanest  corporations  in  the  country,  the 
other  a  corporation  lawyer  of  national  reputation.  They 
said  they  would  furnish  the  facts  if  I  would  write  an  ar- 
ticle showing  the  methods  by  which  some  typical  big  corpo- 
rations were  being  "  wrecked."  *  Why  were  they  willing  to 
tell?  Because,  they  said,  the  financial  licentiousness  and 
the  criminal  corruption  of  the  financial  rings  they  had  in 
mind  were  a  menace  to  corporate  and  all  other  business. 
And  their  examples  were  all  taken  from  Jersey-made 
trusts,  or  from  the  operations  of  men  interested  in  the 
exploitation  of  that  State  which  protected  the  wreckers. 

i  This  has  been  done  by  others  since ;  the  insurance  business,  for 
example, 


286     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

Business  men  stand  license  no  better  than  politicians. 
Having  no  self-restraint,  they  need  the  restraint  of  law, 
and  having  been  placed  by  Jersey  where  they  long  have 
wanted  to  be,  above  the  law,  they  find  that  anarchy,  finan- 
cial anarchy,  is  hurting  business.  So  Jersey's  liberal  policy 
does  not  pay  business?  Whom  does  it  pay?  Not  us,  not 
the  other  States,  not  the  United  States.  With  millions  of 
men  holding  watered  stock  in  fallen  or  falling  corpora- 
tions, which  have  been  robbed  like  cities,  and  with  the 
President  urging  national  control  in  the  interest  of  busi- 
ness and  fair  play,  that  conclusion  needs  no  enforcement. 
And,  besides,  "  to  hell  with  the  rest."  That  is  Jersey's 
attitude  to-day;  Governor  Stokes  is  advocating  other, 
higher  principles ;  but  strong  forces  are  opposing  him, 
and,  to  carry  the  State,  he  is  appealing  to  Jersey  motives, 
to  wit:  to  save  the  business  to  the  State.  And,  as  for  the 
rest  of  us,  many  of  us  envy  Jersey.  She  is  making  money 
at  the  expense  of  the  rest  of  us;  she  is  trafficking  in 
treason;  but  Delaware,  Maryland,  West  Virginia,  South 
Dakota  and  Maine  are  seeking  by  still  greater  liberality 
to  get  the  trusts  to  come  to  them,  and  New  York,  Rhode 
Island,  Massachusetts,  and  others  would  like  to — because 
they  think  it  pays.  That  is  the  American  attitude.  And 
the  great  American  question  is:  Does  it  pay? 

Let  us  go  back  to  Jersey.  Does  it  really  pay  her?  Has 
she  good  government? 

The  government  of  New  Jersey  is  a  syndicate.  You 
have  noticed,  perhaps,  that  I  have  had  little  to  say  about 
individual  men.  The  reason  is  that  there  aren't  any.  Since 
Abbett,  the  Democratic  Governor,  and  Senator  Sewell, 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE     287 

the  Republican  boss,  died,  Jersey  hasn't  had  any  con- 
spicuous, leading  men,  good  or  bad,  on  the  machine  side 
or  on  the  side  of  reform.  There  are  bosses,  like  Major 
Lentz  in  Essex  County  and  David  Baird  in  Camden,  and 
there  are  reformers,  too,  but  the  bosses  are  local  political 
agents  of  the  controlling  business  interests — and  the  re- 
formers are  county  reformers.  Both  parties  take  con- 
tributions from  the  business  interests,  organize  the  voters 
county  by  county,  appoint  candidates,  and  deliver  to  the 
business  interests  the  sovereignty  of  the  citizens  in  the 
shape  of  local  and  State  officers  and  legislators  who 
take  orders  like  dummy-directors  and  deliver  franchises, 
charters,  and  laws  to  the  local,  State,  and  national  busi- 
ness interests  that  pay.  The  higher  officers  are  represent- 
atives, customers,  attorneys,  or  agents  of  the  chief  sources 
of  corruption ;  they  typically  are  business  men,  sometimes 
clean-handed,  but  they  represent  dirty  money  washed  white 
in  campaign  funds  and,  instinctively,  they  stand  for 
privileged  business.  The  railroads,  with  the  Pennsylvania 
at  their  head,  and  the  so-called  "  Prudential  Insurance — 
Fidelity  Trust-Public  Service  Corporation "  crowd,  are 
the  largest  political  spenders.  Therefore  they  dominate. 
As  between  the  Pennsylvania  and  this  Public  Service 
group,  the  Public  Service  is  the  stronger.  The  Governor, 
Mr.  Stokes,  retired  from  a  Pennsylvania  directorate  to 
run  for  his  office,  but  both  the  United  States  Senators, 
John  Kean  and  John  F.  Dryden,  are  public  utility  men. 
This  does  not  mean  that  they  are  against  the  "  roads  " ; 
they  are  showing  in  the  Senate  that  they  are  "  safe  "  for 
the  railroads.  All  the  "  rise  "  of  these  men  means  is  that 


288     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

the  public  utilities  are  the  more  active  corruptionists ;  the 
railroads  don't  want  much  more  now  out  of  Jersey,  only 
to  be  left  alone;  they  don't  care  to  rule  just  for  the  sake 
of  ruling.  If  some  other  business,  not  antagonistic,  will 
attend  to  the  government  and  put  up  enough  money  to 
keep  politics  corrupt  so  that  any  business  man  can  get 
what  he  wants  for  a  fair  price,  the  railroads  are  glad  to 
neglect  politics.  Now  the  trolleys  and  other  public  utility 
businesses  are  still  building  up  their  business  in  Jersey; 
they  are  extending  lines,  buying  and  absorbing  plants, 
making  contracts  all  the  time,  so  that  they  have,  anyway, 
to  keep  in  touch  with  politics,  and  at  the  bottom,  too,  in 
the  cities  and  counties.  Senator  Kean  has  some  independ- 
ent public  utilities  down  his  way,  but  most  of  the  water, 
gas,  electric  light  and  power,  and  the  trolleys  of  New 
Jersey  are  held  by  the  Public  Service  Corporation,  Thomas 
N.  McCarter,  president.  This  company  was  financed  by 
the  Fidelity  Trust  Co.,  Uzal  H.  McCarter,  president. 
And  back  of  the  trust  are  the  men  in  the  Prudential  In- 
surance Company,  John  F.  Dryden,  president.  Naturally, 
when  General  Sewell  died  Mr.  Dryden  was  elected  to  the 
Senate.  He  had  never  taken  any  part  in  politics  before, 
and  his  election  caused  some  surprise  and  some  difficulty ; 
his  friends  had  to  buy  outright  several  votes  for  him — un- 
beknown to  him,  they  say — but  that  will  probably  not 
happen  again.  Unless  there  is  "  reform  "  in  Jersey,  the 
next  time  he  runs  for  the  United  States  Senate,  he  will 
probably  go  through  as  the  chief  visible  representative 
of  the  system.  I  say  visible,  because  the  Prudential  has 
relations  with  the  Equitable  Life  in  New  York  City;  and 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE     289 

since  the  Pennsylvania  resides  in  Philadelphia,  the  real 
seat  of  the  government  of  New  Jersey,  the  most  selfish  and 
provincial  of  States,  is  outside  its  borders,  and  the  State 
government,  which  so  liberally  has  served  national  trusts, 
actually  is  governed  by  a  syndicate  representing  national 
corporate  interests.  Is  this  good  government? 

When  I  first  went  to  work  in  Jersey  I  was  made  most 
welcome  everywhere,  by  good  citizens  who,  aware  of  the 
corrupt  conditions  all  about  them,  wanted  to  help  me  to 
expose — what?  The  charter-granting  system  by  which 
Jersey  was  betraying  the  citizens  and  the  sound  business 
of  the  whole  country?  Oh,  no,  they  said.  That  was  all 
right ;  that  relieved  Jerseymen  of  their  State  taxes.  What, 
then,  the  State?  The  Public  Service  Corporation  and  the 
Lehigh  Valley  Railroad  were  preparing  at  that  time  to 
abandon  the  old  Morris  Canal,  and  to  divide  it  up,  the 
railroad  to  sell  off  the  water  and  the  trolley  to  have  the 
canal-way  for  a  trolley  line.  R.  H.  McCarter,  the  Attor- 
ney-General who  must  pass  upon  the  bill,  is  a  brother  of 
Tom  McCarter,  president  of  the  Public  Service  Corpora- 
tion, and  he  was  counsel  for  the  Lehigh  Valley ;  and  the 
Legislature  is  owned  by  the  Public  Service  and  Railroad 
lobbies.  Did  they  want  me  to  show  up  the  State  govern- 
ment which  made  them  despair  of  defeating  this  typical 
scheme  of  despoliation?  No,  they  said,  the  State  was  in 
pretty  good  shape.  There  might  be  some  evils,  but  the 
government  was  in  the  hands  of  good  business  men,  safe 
and  conservative,  and  they  had  it  in  an  excellent  financial 
condition.  Very  well,  then,  what  would  they  have  me  "  ex- 
pose"? Why,  their  county.  "Do  Passaic  county,"  they 


290     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

said,  in  Paterson ;  "  we  are  having  an  investigation  here 
right  now."  They  were,  and  the  condition  was  rotten  with 
petty,  political  graft.  In  Newark  and  the  Oranges  they 
offered  me  Essex  County.  "  That  is  the  center  of  the 
whole  business,"  they  urged.  And  it  is.  But  Jersey  City, 
bestraddled  and  hemmed  in  by  railroads  which  paid  her 
no  taxes,  and  shut  her  off  from  the  water  with  their 
ferries  and  terminals,  which  denied  the  city  easement  for 
sewers — Jersey  City  would  have  made  an  interesting 
article.  At  the  other  end  of  the  State,  however,  there  was 
Camden  declaring,  "  We  are  the  worst.  We  need  exposure 
the  most."  Exposure!  I  have  never  exposed  anybody  or 
anything,  and  no  exposure  is  needed  in  any  American  com- 
munity. What  everybody  knows  is  more  than  enough  ma- 
terial for  me,  and  in  Jersey  everybody  knows  everything 
apparently.  The  trouble  there  is  that  such  citizenship  as 
they  have  is  mean,  narrow,  local.  Jersey,  in  the  mind  of 
the  average  Jerseyman  is  a  group  of  counties,  and  his  con- 
cern, if  he  worries  at  all,  is  with  the  petty  evils  of  his  own 
sordid  surroundings.  My  concern  is  for  the  other  States 
that  Jersey  is  selling  out,  my  interest  is  in  the  story  of 
the  troubles  she  has  caused  me  and  you,  not  in  the  troubles 
of  Jerseymen.  I  didn't  know  when  I  set  out  that  they  had 
any.  I  had  heard  that  Jersey  got  good  government  out 
of  her  ruling  corporations.  And  when  I  found  that  they 
really  had  troubles  of  their  own,  my  first  impulse  was  to 
rejoice.  My  first  feeling  was  that  I'd  like  to  see  the  citizens 
of  this  selfish  State  pickle  in  the  corruption  of  Hudson 
County  and  Essex,  of  Camden,  and  Passaic,  and  Middle- 
sex, and  Ocean.  And  when  President  Roosevelt  proposed 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE      291 

that  the  Federal  Government  should  take  over  the  charter- 
granting  function  from  the  States,  I  said  "  Good ;  it  will 
serve  Jersey  right.  She  deserves  all  the  punishment  we 
can  give  her." 

That  feeling  was  wrong.  The  President's  suggestion 
may  be  sound,  but  I  notice  that  many  leading  corporation 
men  are  leaning  in  that  direction,  and  that  makes  me 
pause.  Why  this  bad  faith  in  Washington  ?  Is  the  national 
government  more  corrupt  than  that  of  the  States?  Is  it 
more  representative  of  business  than  Jersey? 

But  there  is  another  reason  why  I  know  my  feeling  about 
punishing  Jersey  is  wrong:  It  is  too  Jersey-like.  That 
is  the  spirit  which  has  betrayed  Jersey  and  made  her  be- 
tray the  rest  of  us.  It  is  the  spirit  of  the  reformers  of 
the  Oranges,  of  Hudson,  and  Camden,  and  they  were  in  a 
fair  way  of  finding  it  out  when  I  was  there.  Camden 
elected  as  Mayor  Joseph  E.  Nowrey,  a  Democrat  who 
represented  the  city.  David  Baird,  the  Republican  boss,  is 
chairman  of  the  State  board  that  taxes  railroads,  and  he 
is  in  business  with  the  Public  Service  Corporation  in  his 
county.  He  had  the  State  Legislature  take  away  the 
veto  and  other  powers  of  the  Mayor.  And  thus  Camden 
must  see  that  Camden's  issue  cannot  be  fought  out  in 
Camden  County. 

Jersey  City  has  for  its  Mayor  a  Republican,  Mark 
Fagan,  who  is  one  of  the  few  real  democrats  in  this 
State.  He  has  stood  for  "  equal  taxation,"  which  is  in- 
deed the  issue  in  his  city,  but  he  had  to  go  to  the  Legis- 
lature. What  did  he  find?  He  wrote  Governor  Murphy,  a 
fellow  Republican,  a  letter  describing  what  he  found; 


292     STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

here  is  part  of  it :  "  The  Republican  Legislature  is  con- 
trolled by  the  railroad,  trolley,  and  water  corporations, 
and  the  interests  of  the  people  are  being  betrayed.  While 
I  charge  no  man  with  personal  corruption,  I  do  not  hesi- 
tate to  say  that  this  is  a  condition  of  affairs  which  is 
essentially  corrupt,  and  which,  if  unchecked,  means  the 
virtual  control  of  our  State  and  our  party  by  corpora- 
tions. As  a  citizen  I  say  that  this  condition  is  dangerous 
and  demoralizing.  As  a  public  official  I  protest  against 
the  injustice  done  to  Jersey  City.  As  a  member  of  the 
Republican  party  I  deplore  its  subserviency  to  corporate 
greed  and  injustice.  No  political  party  can  long  receive 
the  support  of  the  people  with  such  a  record  as  this  Re- 
publican Legislature  is  making." 

The  Orange  men  are  not  willing  to  grant  forever  and  for 
nothing  a  trolley  extension  to  the  Public  Service  Corpora- 
tion. They  appeal  to  their  local  aldermen,  only  to  find  them 
bought  up.  By  threats  they  frighten  off  the  company, 
which  proposes  a  Greater  Newark  to  swallow  up  Orange 
in  one  well-owned  municipality.  The  Orange  men  go  to 
Trenton  with  a  bill  to  limit  all  franchises  to  twenty-five 
years,  and  they  find,  what  Mayor  Fagan  found,  that  their 
Legislature  does  not  represent  them ;  not  even  all  the  repre- 
sentatives from  their  own  town  represent  them.  Wouldn't 
you  think  they  would  see,  Orange  and  Camden  and  Hudson, 
that  the  trouble  is  not  that  their  local  governments  are  bad, 
but  that  no  part  of  their  government  represents  them  ?  and 
that  the  thing  to  do  is  to  begin  in  their  counties,  make  their 
Mayors  and  aldermen,  not  "  good  men,"  but  men  who 
will  represent  them,  or  be  beaten.  And  that,  this  done,  all 


NEW    JERSEY:    A    TRAITOR    STATE     293 

the  good  citizens  in  all  the  counties  should  get  together, 
pledge  their  own  legislators  not  only  to  represent  their 
own  county,  but  the  wishes  of  good  citizens  in  all  counties, 
and  last,  but  not  least,  that  all  these  same  citizens  should 
see  to  it  that  this  Legislature  should,  first,  send  to  the 
Senate  Senators  who  would  represent  you  and  me,  and, 
second,  pass  no  bills  that  would  betray  the  will  and  injure 
the  business  of  the  United  States?  But,  no,  the  local  spirit 
of  Jersey  is  the  spirit  of  counties,  cities,  and  States  all 
over  the  country.  It  is  the  home-rule  sentiment  which 
says :  "  Give  us  good  government,  and  to  hell  with  the 
rest."  And  that,  again,  is  the  American  spirit. 

If  our  national  government  is  corrupt,  it  is  because 
Jersey  and  other  States,  being  corrupt,  send  their  Keans 
and  Drydens  to  the  Senate,  and  their  Gardners  and  Mc- 
Dermotts  to  the  House  to  misrepresent  all  of  us.  And  if 
Jersey  and  the  other  States  are  corrupt,  it  is  because 
their  Jersey  Cities,  and  their  Hudson  and  Essex  Counties, 
being  corrupt,  send  their  graduates  in  corruption  to  the 
State  Legislature  to  misrepresent  all  the  counties.  Jersey- 
men  can't  see  it  so,  but  this  is  the  truth:  Jersey's  policy 
toward  the  trusts,  which  is  the  cause  of  so  much  trouble 
to  all  the  rest  of  us,  is  the  cause  of  the  trouble  of  all  the 
counties  of  Jersey.  The  corruption  of  those  counties  is 
the  foundation  of  the  "  good "  State  government  that 
sells  us  out  for  fees,  which,  turned  back  into  the  counties 
to  relieve  them  of  taxes,  act  upon  the  character  of  Jersey's 
citizens  like  bribes :  they  keep  Jerseymen  contented  with  a 
State  government  which  represents,  not  you  and  me  and 
them,  but  corrupt  special  business  interests,  at  home  and 


STRUGGLE    FOR    SELF-GOVERNMENT 

abroad.  The  cry  of  Americans  in  wards,  counties,  cities, 
States,  and  the  United  States  should  be,  not  good  govern- 
men,  but  "  representative  government."  2 

2  A  promising  movement  for  representative  government  in  New 
Jersey  has  been  started  under  the  leadership  of  Senator  Everett 
Colby  of  Essex,  who  beat  his  boss,  Carl  Lentz,  in  the  fall  of  1905. 
Back  of  Colby  are  the  followers  of  Mayor  Fagan  of  Jersey  City  and 
the  reformers  of  Newark  and  the  Oranges,  in  Essex  County.  They 
carried  every  county  that  they  worked  in  last  fall,  and,  reaching  out 
to  organize  other  counties,  the  movement  they  have  inaugurated 
bids  fair  to  make  Jersey  one  of  the  leaders  of  State  and  National 
Reform  in  the  United  States. 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 

405  Hilgard  Avenue,  Los  Angeles,  CA  90024-1388 

Return  this  material  to  the  library 

from  which  it  was  borrowed. 


DC  SOUTHERN  REGIONAL  LIBRARY  FACILITY 


A     000  741  545     8 


